The UK psychiatrists' experience of rationalising antipsychotics in adults with intellectual disabilities: A qualitative data analysis of free-text questionnaire responses.

BACKGROUND: Overprescribing of off-licence psychotropic medications, particularly antipsychotics, for challenging behaviours in people with intellectual disabilities without a psychiatric disorder is a significant public health concern. In the United Kingdom, the National Health Service England launched an initiative in 2016, 'STopping Over-Medication of People with learning disabilities, autism or both (STOMP)', to address this concern. STOMP is supposed to encourage psychiatrists in the United Kingdom and elsewhere to rationalise psychotropic medication use in people with intellectual disabilities. The current study aims to gather UK psychiatrists' views and experience of implementing the STOMP initiative. METHODS: An online questionnaire was sent to all UK psychiatrists working in the field of intellectual disabilities (estimated 225). Two open-ended questions allowed participants to write comments in response to these questions in the free text boxes. One question asked about the challenges psychiatrists faced locally to implement STOMP, and the other asked for examples of successes and positive experiences from the process. The free text data were analysed using a qualitative method with the help of the NVivo 12 plus software. RESULTS: Eighty-eight (estimated 39%) psychiatrists returned the completed questionnaire. The qualitative analysis of free-text data has shown variation within services in the experience and views of the psychiatrists. In areas with good support for STOMP implementation provided through adequate resources, psychiatrists reported satisfaction in the process with successful antipsychotic rationalisation, better local multi-disciplinary and multi-agency working, and increased awareness of STOMP issues among the stakeholders such as people with intellectual disabilities and their caregivers and multidisciplinary teams, and improved quality of life caused by reduced medication-related adverse events in people with intellectual disabilities. However, where resource utilisation is not optimum, psychiatrists seemed dissatisfied with the process with little success in medication rationalisation. CONCLUSIONS: Whereas some psychiatrists are successful and enthusiastic about rationalising antipsychotics, others still face barriers and challenges. Much work is needed to achieve a uniformly positive outcome throughout the United Kingdom.

Use of peripheral neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio and peripheral monocyte levels to predict survival in fibrotic hypersensitivity pneumonitis (fHP): a multicentre retrospective cohort study.

The factors determining disease course and survival in fibrotic hypersensitivity pneumonitis (fHP) have not been fully elucidated.The aim of this study was to describe the characteristics of patients with fHP in a real-world cohort and investigate factors associated with worse outcomes. We aimed to explore the use of neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and peripheral blood monocyte levels in predicting mortality. METHODS: A retrospective, multicentre, observational UK cohort study. RESULTS: Patients with fHP were significantly younger than those with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) (median age fHP 73 vs IPF 75 years) and were much more likely to be woman (fHP 61% vs IPF 26%). In almost half of all fHP cases (49%, n=104/211), no causative antigen was identified from either the history or specific antigen testing. Overall, fHP was associated with a better survival than IPF, although median survival of both groups was poor (fHP 62 months vs IPF 52 months).IPF survival in patients with a high NLR was significantly lower than those with a low NLR (44 vs 83 months). A monocyte count ≥0.95 K/uL also predicted significantly poorer outcomes for patients with IPF compared with <0.95 K/uL (33 vs 57 months). In contrast, NLR and monocyte count did not predict survival in the fHP cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Although fHP has a statistically lower mortality than IPF, absolute survival time of both conditions is poor. High baseline NLR and absolute monocyte counts predict worse survival in IPF but not in fHP, highlighting the potential for divergence in their pathogenic mechanisms.

UK psychiatrists' experience of withdrawal of antipsychotics prescribed for challenging behaviours in adults with intellectual disabilities and/or autism.

BACKGROUND: A high proportion of adults with intellectual disabilities are prescribed off-licence antipsychotics in the absence of a psychiatric illness. The National Health Service in England launched an initiative in 2016, 'Stopping over-medication of people with a learning disability [intellectual disability], autism or both' (STOMP), to address this major public health concern. AIMS: To gain understanding from UK psychiatrists working with adults with intellectual disabilities on the successes and challenges of withdrawing antipsychotics for challenging behaviours. METHOD: An online questionnaire was sent to all UK psychiatrists working in the field of intellectual disability (estimated 225). RESULTS: Half of the 88 respondents stated that they started withdrawing antipsychotics over 5 years ago and 52.3% stated that they are less likely to initiate an antipsychotic since the launch of STOMP. However, since then, 46.6% are prescribing other classes of psychotropic medication instead of antipsychotics for challenging behaviours, most frequently the antidepressants. Complete antipsychotic discontinuation in over 50% of patients treated with antipsychotics was achieved by only 4.5% of respondents (n = 4); 11.4% reported deterioration in challenging behaviours in over 50% of patients on withdrawal and the same proportion (11.4%) reported no deterioration. Only 32% of respondents made the diagnosis of psychiatric illness in all their patients themselves. Family and paid carers' concern, lack of multi-agency and multidisciplinary input and unavailability of non-medical psychosocial intervention are key reported factors hampering the withdrawal attempt. CONCLUSIONS: There is an urgent need to develop national guidelines to provide a framework for systematic psychotropic drug reviews and withdrawal where possible.