4.5 Article

LAI versus oral: A case-control study on subjective experience of antipsychotic maintenance treatment

期刊

EUROPEAN PSYCHIATRY
卷 37, 期 -, 页码 35-42

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2016.05.008

关键词

Schizophrenia and psychosis; Antipsychotics; Quality of life; Quality of care

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: To present real-world evidence on the differences between long-acting injectable (LAI) and oral antipsychotic maintenance treatment (AMT) in terms of subjective well-being, attitudes towards drug and quality of life in a sample of remitted schizophrenic subjects. Methods: Twenty outpatients with remitted schizophrenia treated with either olanzapine or paliperidone and switching from the oral to the LAI formulation of their maintenance treatment were recruited before the switch (LAI-AMT group). A group of 20 remitted schizophrenic subjects with oral AMT and matching main sociodemographic, clinical and treatment variables made up the control group (oral-AMT group). All participants were assessed in terms of objective (PANSS, YMRS, MADRS) and subjective (SWN-K, DAI-10, SF-36) treatment outcomes at baseline (T0) and after 6 months (T1). Results: Between T0 and T1, general psychopathology of the PANSS, DAI-10, and all but one of the SWN-K dimensions (except for social integration), showed significantly higher percentages of improvement in the LAI-AMT group compared to the oral-AMT group. A generalized expansion of health-related quality of life, with better functioning in almost all areas of daily living, was reported by the LAI-AMT group after the 6-month period. In contrast, the oral-AMT group reported a significant worsening of health-related quality of life in the areas of emotional role and social functioning in the same period. Conclusions: Our study indicates possible advantages of LAI over oral antipsychotic formulation in terms of subjective experience of maintenance treatment in remitted schizophrenic patients. Size and duration of this study need to be expanded in order to produce more solid and generalizable results. (C) 2016 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据