Dataset Information

Patients' perception of coercion with respect to antipsychotic treatment of psychotic disorders and its predictors.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

The present study investigates perceived coercion in psychiatric inpatients under prescribed antipsychotic medication without a court order. The objective of this study was to investigate whether and to what extent involuntary and voluntary inpatients feel coerced to take their medication and which factors affect perceived coercion.

Methods

Voluntarily and involuntarily admitted patients (55 and 36, respectively) were interviewed about the extent of perceived coercion. In addition, socio-demographic and clinical data were collected. The Admission Experience Scale (aAES) was used to assess perceived coercion concerning medication. To measure insight into illness, attitude towards medication, and symptom severity, we used a questionnaire on insight into illness (FKE-10), the Drug Attitude Inventory (DAI-10), and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS-24), respectively.

Results

Voluntarily treated patients experienced significantly less coercion when taking prescribed medication in inpatient settings than involuntarily treated patients. The experience of coercion was not related to socio-demographic or clinical variables nor to the BPRS-24 score, but to insight into illness and attitude towards medication. Patients who had experienced at least one coercive measure during the index hospital stay showed a higher level of perceived coercion.

Conclusion

Perceived coercion related to medication is dependent on insight into illness and experience of previous coercive interventions rather than on the severity of psychopathological symptoms. These findings are very similar to a previous study in a forensic psychiatric sample. Having experience of at least one coercive measure seems to be a decisive aspect of the extent of the patients' perceived coercion.

SUBMITTER: Hirsch S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8316198 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAntipsychotic-related weight gain is a common clinically relevant side effect when treating psychotic disorders in pediatric populations, yet few predictors and no moderators of antipsychotic-related weight gain are known.MethodsThe Treatment of Early-Onset Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders (TEOSS) study randomized 119 youths (age 8-19 years) with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder to 8 weeks of antipsychotic treatment with molindone, risperidone, or olanzapine and assessed treatment response and side effects. In this secondary analysis, we used multivariable linear regression and receiver operating characteristic analysis to investigate predictors and moderators of weight change and percent weight change from baseline to week 8.ResultsTreatment assignment was the most discriminant predictor of weight change [F(2, 66) = 17.00, p < 0.001] and percent weight change [F(2, 66) = 16.85, p < 0.001]. Mean weight gain was 0.74 (standard deviation ±3.51) kg for molindone, 4.13 ± 3.79 kg for risperidone, and 7.29 ± 3.44 kg for olanzapine. After adjusting for treatment assignment, lower pretreatment hemoglobin A1C (HgbA1C) predicted more weight gain [F(1, 55) = 4.71, p = 0.03]. Diagnosis (schizoaffective vs. schizophrenia) moderated weight change [F(2, 63) = 6.02, p = 0.004] and percent weight change [F(2, 63) = 5.26, p = 0.008] such that schizoaffective diagnosis predicted larger weight gain for youths in the risperidone treatment arm. Age, sex, family income, baseline weight, and symptoms neither predicted nor moderated weight change or percent weight change.ConclusionWe identified prognostic subgroups and novel risk factors for antipsychotic-related weight gain. We confirmed that antipsychotic choice is extremely important for predicting future weight gain. We also found that younger age did not predict greater weight gain, in contrast to prior studies. Our findings require replication in an independent sample because we did not adjust for multiple comparisons to minimize false negatives. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00053703.

Project description:Absolute and relative risks of violence are increased in patients with psychotic disorders, but the contribution of triggers for violent acts to these risks is uncertain.To examine whether a range of triggers for violent acts are associated with risks of violence in patients diagnosed with psychotic disorders and in individuals without a psychiatric diagnosis.Using a sample of all individuals born in Sweden between 1958 and 1988 (N?=?3?123?724), we identified patients in the National Patient Register who were diagnosed with schizophrenia spectrum disorders (n?=?34?903) and bipolar disorder (n?=?29?692), as well as unaffected controls (n?=?2?763?012). We then identified, within each subsample, persons who had experienced any of the following triggers for violent acts between January 1, 2001, and December 15, 2013: exposure to violence, parental bereavement, self-harm, traumatic brain injury, unintentional injuries, and substance intoxication. By using within-individual models, we conducted conditional logistic regression to compare the risk of the individual engaging in violent acts in the week following the exposure to a trigger with the risk during earlier periods of equivalent length. All time-invariant confounders (eg, genetic and early environmental influences) were controlled for by this research design and we further adjusted for time-varying sociodemographic factors.Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) of violent crime occurring in the week following the exposure to a trigger event compared with earlier periods.Among the sample of 2?827?607 individuals (1?492?186 male and 1?335?421 female), all of the examined trigger events were associated with increased risk of violent crime in the week following exposure. The largest 1-week absolute risk of violent crime was observed following exposure to violence (70-177 violent crimes per 10?000 persons). For most triggers, the relative risks did not vary significantly by diagnosis, including unintentional injuries (aOR range, 3.5-4.8), self-harm (aOR range, 3.9-4.2), and substance intoxication (aOR range, 3.0-4.0). Differences by diagnosis included parental bereavement, which was significantly higher in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders (aOR, 5.0; 95% CI, 3.0-8.1) compared with controls (aOR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.3-2.2).In addition to identifying risk factors for violence, clarifying the timing of the triggers may provide opportunities to improve risk assessment and management in individuals with psychotic disorders.

Project description:BackgroundSince the introduction of antipsychotics, especially the so called atypicals, the treatment of schizophrenia has shown important improvements. At the present time, it is preferred to label clozapine and other antipsychotics sharing similar profiles as second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs). These medications have been proposed by some experts as a first line treatment for schizophrenia. It is critical to have reliable data about antipsychotic prescription in Mexico and to create management guidelines based on expert meetings and not only on studies carried out by the pharmaceutical industry. Only this approach will help to make the right decisions for the treatment of schizophrenia.MethodsA translated version of Rabinowitz's survey was used to evaluate antipsychotic prescription preferences and patterns in Mexican psychiatrists. The survey questionnaire was sent by mail to 200 psychiatrists from public institutions and private practice in Mexico City and Guadalajara, Mexico.ResultsRecommendations for antipsychotics daily doses at different stages of the treatment of schizophrenia varied widely. Haloperidol was considered as the first choice for the treatment of positive symptoms. On the contrary, risperidone was the first option for negative symptoms. For a patient with a high susceptibility for developing extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), risperidone was the first choice. It was also considered that SGAs had advantages over typical antipsychotics in the management of negative symptoms, cognitive impairment and fewer EPS.Besides, there was a clear tendency for prescribing typical antipsychotics at higher doses than recommended and inadequate doses for the atypical ones.ConclusionsSome of the obstacles for the prescription of SGAs include their high cost, deficient knowledge about their indications and dosage, the perception of their being less efficient for the treatment of positive symptoms and the resistance of some Mexican physicians to change their prescription pattern. It is necessary to reach a consensus, in order to establish and standardize the treatment of schizophrenia, based on the information reported in clinical trials and prevailing economic conditions in Mexico.