4.6 Article

Adherence to treatment guidelines in clinical practice: study of antipsychotic treatment prior to clozapine initiation

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY
Volume 201, Issue 6, Pages 481-485

Publisher

ROYAL COLLEGE OF PSYCHIATRISTS
DOI: 10.1192/bjp.bp.111.105833

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. MRC, UK grant [MC-A656-5QD30]
  2. National Institute of Health Research Biomedical Research Centre
  3. AstraZeneca
  4. Janssen-Cilag
  5. Servier
  6. Sanofi-Aventis
  7. Lundbeck
  8. Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS)
  9. Novartis
  10. Eli Lilly
  11. Wyeth
  12. GSK
  13. Bioline
  14. Janssen (JJ)
  15. NeuroSearch
  16. Pfizer
  17. Roche
  18. Solvay Wyeth
  19. MRC [G0700995, MC_U120097115] Funding Source: UKRI
  20. Medical Research Council [1116129, G0700995, MC_U120097115] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Clozapine is the only antipsychotic drug licensed for treatment-resistant schizophrenia but its use is often delayed. Since previous studies, national guidelines on the use of clozapine and other antipsychotics have been disseminated to clinicians. Aims To determine the theoretical delay to clozapine initiation and to quantify the prior use of antipsychotic polypharmacy and high-dose antipsychotic treatment. Method Clinico-demographic data were extracted from the treatment records of all patients commencing clozapine in our centre between 2006 and 2010. Results Complete records were available for 149 patients. The mean theoretical delay in initiating clozapine was 47.7 months (s.d.=49.7). Before commencing clozapine, antipsychotic polypharmacy and high-dose treatment was evident in 36.2 and 34.2% of patients respectively. Theoretical delay was related to illness duration (beta=0.7, P<0.001) but did not differ by gender or ethnicity. Conclusions Substantial delays to clozapine initiation remain and antipsychotic polypharmacy and high doses are commonly used prior to clozapine, despite treatment guidelines.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available