The lived experience of clozapine discontinuation in patients and carers following suspected clozapine-induced neutropenia.

BACKGROUND: Clozapine is the treatment of choice in refractory psychosis. In most countries, clozapine must be stopped indefinitely if white blood cells fall below a defined threshold during routine monitoring. Despite evidence of severe adverse consequences of clozapine discontinuation, published accounts on the lived experiences and perspectives of patients and carers are scarce. METHOD: We completed semi-structured interviews with patients (n = 4) and family carers (n = 4) on experiences of clozapine cessation following suspected drug-induced neutropenia. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically. RESULTS: The two overarching themes comprised:(i) stress of clozapine below threshold neutrophil results and (ii) patient and carer priorities. CONCLUSIONS: There is a suggested need for evidence-based pharmacological and psychological approaches to support patients and carers after clozapine cessation. Such approaches will minimise the potentially negative physical and emotional sequela in the aftermath of a below threshold neutrophil result and reduce the likelihood of experiencing additional health and social inequalities after clozapine discontinuation.

Recovery Colleges Characterisation and Testing in England (RECOLLECT): rationale and protocol.

BACKGROUND: Recovery Colleges are a relatively recent initiative within mental health services. The first opened in 2009 in London and since then numbers have grown. They are based on principles of personal recovery in mental health, co-production between people with lived experience of mental health problems and professionals, and adult learning. Student eligibility criteria vary, but all serve people who use mental health services, with empirical evidence of benefit. Previously we developed a Recovery College fidelity measure and a preliminary change model identifying the mechanisms of action and outcomes for this group, which we refer to as service user students. The Recovery Colleges Characterisation and Testing (RECOLLECT) study is a five-year (2020-2025) programme of research in England. The aim of RECOLLECT is to determine Recovery Colleges' effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, and identify organisational influences on fidelity and improvements in mental health outcomes.  METHODS: RECOLLECT comprises i) a national survey of Recovery Colleges, ii) a prospective cohort study to establish the relationship between fidelity, mechanisms of action and psychosocial outcomes, iii) a prospective cohort study to investigate effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, iv) a retrospective cohort study to determine the relationship between Recovery College use and outcomes and mental health service use, and v) organisational case studies to establish the contextual and organisational factors influencing fidelity and outcomes. The programme has been developed with input from individuals who have lived experience of mental health problems. A Lived Experience Advisory Panel will provide input into all stages of the research. DISCUSSION: RECOLLECT will provide the first rigorous evidence on the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of Recovery Colleges in England, to inform their prioritising, commissioning, and running. The validated RECOLLECT multilevel change model will confirm the active components of Recovery Colleges. The fidelity measure and evidence about the fidelity-outcome relationship will provide an empirically-based approach to develop Recovery Colleges, to maximise benefits for students. Findings will be disseminated through the study website (researchintorecovery.com/recollect) and via national and international Recovery College networks to maximise impact, and will shape policy on how Recovery Colleges can help those with mental health problems lead empowered, meaningful and fulfilling lives.

Investigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on recovery colleges: multi-site qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, mental health problems increased as access to mental health services reduced. Recovery colleges are recovery-focused adult education initiatives delivered by people with professional and lived mental health expertise. Designed to be collaborative and inclusive, they were uniquely positioned to support people experiencing mental health problems during the pandemic. There is limited research exploring the lasting impacts of the pandemic on recovery college operation and delivery to students. AIMS: To ascertain how the COVID-19 pandemic changed recovery college operation in England. METHOD: We coproduced a qualitative interview study of recovery college managers across the UK. Academics and co-researchers with lived mental health experience collaborated on conducting interviews and analysing data, using a collaborative thematic framework analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-one managers participated. Five themes were identified: complex organisational relationships, changed ways of working, navigating the rapid transition to digital delivery, responding to isolation and changes to accessibility. Two key pandemic-related changes to recovery college operation were highlighted: their use as accessible services that relieve pressure on mental health services through hybrid face-to-face and digital course delivery, and the development of digitally delivered courses for individuals with mental health needs. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic either led to or accelerated developments in recovery college operation, leading to a positioning of recovery colleges as a preventative service with wider accessibility to people with mental health problems, people under the care of forensic mental health services and mental healthcare staff. These benefits are strengthened by relationships with partner organisations and autonomy from statutory healthcare infrastructures.

Relaxation of the criteria for entry to the UK Clozapine Central Non-Rechallenge Database: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Clozapine is uniquely effective in treatment-resistant psychosis. In the UK, patients must discontinue clozapine indefinitely if they are placed on the Central Non-Rechallenge Database (CNRD) after their haematological parameters fall below particular thresholds. Under exceptional circumstances, patients can be rechallenged on clozapine under an off-licence agreement. In the USA in 2015, restrictive practice was discontinued to allow greater flexibility for clozapine maintenance. The absolute neutrophil count leading to treatment interruption was lowered from less than 1·5 × 109/L to less than 1·0 × 109/L and platelet and white cell count monitoring were ceased. We aimed to investigate the implications of a similar policy change on clozapine use in the UK. METHODS: This was a modelling study of all patients registered on the UK CNRD. First, we determined the proportion of patients placed on the database in the UK who would have had to discontinue clozapine treatment under the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) criteria. Second, we compared the haematological characteristics of patients who did or did not meet FDA criteria for discontinuing clozapine, including the time to registration from clozapine initiation and the proportion of cases of severe neutropenia at registration. Third, we investigated the success rates of clozapine re-challenge for patients that had been placed on the CNRD. Successful rechallenge was defined as no recurrence of CNRD registration. FINDINGS: Between May 2, 2002 and March 1, 2021, 3731 patients were placed on the CNRD, with a mean age of 47 years (SD 15), including 1420 (38%) women and 2311 (62%) men, of whom 3089 (83%) were White, 360 (10%) were Black, 190 (5%) were Asian, and 92 (2%) were classified as other. 566 (15%) of 3731 patients met the equivalent criteria for clozapine discontinuation under the FDA guidelines. The median time to CNRD registration from clozapine initiation was 1·6 years (IQR 0·2-4·9). Data for 519 rechallenged patients were examined; 419 (81%) were successful. Clozapine rechallenge success rates were broadly similar between individuals who did not meet the US CNRD registration criteria (36 [78%] of 46) and those who did meet the criteria (383 [81%] of 473). INTERPRETATION: Implementing the revised FDA monitoring criteria in the UK would substantially reduce clozapine discontinuation for haematological reasons, which would greatly improve the mental health outcomes of these patients without having a major effect on their physical health. FUNDING: None.

Evaluation of the effectiveness and acceptability of the long-acting oral antipsychotic penfluridol: Illustrative case series.

AIM: In this study, we sought to determine clinical outcomes at 1 year for patients prescribed penfluridol in an inner London National Health Service Trust. Using noninterventional data, we describe the use, effectiveness and safety of this treatment modality. RESULTS: We retrospectively followed up 17 patients prescribed penfluridol as part of routine clinical practice. All patients took penfluridol once weekly. Of these patients, 12 (70.6%) were considered treatment resistant. The average duration of illness for this cohort was 10 years (SD = 6.7). At 1 year, nine (53%) patients remained on treatment. Median survival time was not reached at 1-year follow-up; mean time on penfluridol was 251 days (95% confidence interval (CI), 184-318). The mean number of admissions to hospital in the year following penfluridol initiation was 0.6 compared with 0.8, 1 year before initiation (p = 0.465). The median number of bed days 1 year before penfluridol initiation was 24, whereas in the year following penfluridol initiation, it was 0 (p = 0.514). CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Although penfluridol is unlicensed in the United Kingdom, limited data suggest that this long-acting oral therapy has the potential to be used safely and effectively for the treatment of psychotic disorders. However, more data are required to establish the place of penfluridol and other potential long-acting oral antipsychotic formulations in the treatment of psychotic disorders.