Development of the ITHACA Toolkit for monitoring human rights and general health care in psychiatric and social care institutions.

Background. Human rights violations are commonly experienced by people in psychiatric and social care institutions. States and private organizations providing such health and social services must comply with international human rights law. Monitoring of such compliance is increasingly recognized as a vital component in ensuring that rights are respected and violations are brought out in the open, remedied and prevented. Aims. The Institutional Treatment, Human Rights and Care Assessment (ITHACA) project produced a method to document violations and good practice with the aim of preventing human rights violations and improving general health care practice in psychiatric and social care institutions (www.ithacastudy.eu). Methods. A methodological and implementation study conducted across 15 European countries developed and assessed the ITHACA Toolkit in monitoring visits to 87 mental health organizations. Results. The toolkit is available in 13 European languages and has demonstrated applicability in a range of contexts and conditions. The information gathered through monitoring visits can document both good practice and areas for improvement. Conclusions. The ITHACA Toolkit is an acceptable and feasible method for the systematic monitoring of human rights and general health care in psychiatric and social care institutions that explicitly calls for the participation of service users in the monitoring of human rights violations and general health care practice.

Decrease of energy expenditure causes weight increase in olanzapine treatment - a case study.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the mechanisms underlying weight gain induced by the atypical antipsychotic, olanzapine. We performed euglycemic, hyperinsulinemic clamp combined with indirect calorimetry on a 48-year-old male with antisocial personality disorder, alcohol dependence and paranoid ideation before and after one month of olanzapine (10 - 15 mg/day) therapy. The patient gave his informed, written consent for this study. The results were a weight gain of 6 kg and a decrease in both basal (from 1673 to 1613 kcal/24 h) and 3-hour (from 22.8 to 20.2 cal/kg fat free mass/min) energy expenditure. Serum thyroid hormone and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels decreased, and the triglyceride and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels increased. Insulin sensitivity did not change. We conclude that decreased basal energy expenditure may contribute to weight gain in olanzapine treatment.

Associations between childhood living circumstances and schizophrenia: a population-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: It has been suggested that household crowding may constitute an environmental risk factor for schizophrenia. The present population-based cohort study explores the associations of childhood family size and living conditions to schizophrenia. METHOD: The cohort comprised people born at Helsinki University Central Hospital from 1924 to 1933, who went to school in the city and were still living in Finland in 1971. Prospectively gathered data from birth and school health records of these 7086 individuals were collected and linked to the Finnish Hospital Discharge Register. RESULTS: Ninety-eight cases of schizophrenia were identified in the cohort. Number of siblings at school start was significantly associated with schizophrenia when adjusted for sex and age of mother. Number of siblings was negatively correlated with body mass index at age 7. Childhood household crowding, defined as number of people per room, and total number of rooms in household were not significantly associated with schizophrenia. CONCLUSION: Our study indicates that the total number siblings in household during childhood is of greater importance than childhood number of inhabitants per room. Subjects who originated from families with many children had been leaner, which may imply that childhood nutritional factors partly is the mediating factor between number of siblings and schizophrenia. Other possible underlying mechanisms of the associations found include infectious and psychological factors.

Newer atypical antipsychotic medication versus clozapine for schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Clozapine is an atypical antipsychotic drug, which is claimed to have superior efficacy and to cause fewer movement disorders. However, clozapine carries a significant risk of serious blood disorders. Newer atypical antipsychotics are safer alternatives that might share the benefits of clozapine. It is thus of interest to compare the effectiveness of newer atypical antipsychotics with the effectiveness of clozapine. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical effects of newer atypical antipsychotic drugs in comparison to clozapine for schizophrenia. SEARCH STRATEGY: Publications in all languages were searched from the following databases: Biological Abstracts/BIOSIS (1980-1999), The Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register of Trials (1998), The Cochrane Library CENTRAL Register (Issue 4, 1999), EMBASE (1980-1998), MEDLINE (1966-1999), LILACS/CD-ROM (1998), and PsycLIT/PsycINFO (1974-1999). Trials were also sought from recent conference proceedings and reference lists of included papers. Authors of recent trials and the manufacturers of clozapine, iloperidone, olanzapine, quetiapine, remoxipride, risperidone, sertindole, ziprasidone and zotepine were contacted. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials comparing clozapine with newer atypical antipsychotic drugs were included by independent assessment by two reviewers. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were extracted independently by two reviewers. Relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of homogenous dichotomous data were calculated. A random effects model was used for heterogeneous dichotomous data. Where possible the number needed to treat (NNT) statistic with 95%CI were also calculated. Weighted or standardised means were calculated for continuous data. Due to the small number of included studies, sensitivity analyses or funnel plot statistics were not undertaken for this version of the review. MAIN RESULTS: The current review includes eight studies (22 papers), of which three studies are 4-6 weeks in duration and only one study is of more than 12 weeks' duration. Newer atypical drugs seemed to be broadly similar to clozapine using a clinical global index or trialists' definitions of improvement, but this result was obtained from a relatively small number of studies. Due to the small number of studies and patients, wide confidence intervals were seen when their effectiveness as measured by symptom rating scales was compared. Social functioning was better in patients on newer atypical medication (risperidone) than in those on clozapine, but this finding is based on a single underpowered trial and has to be interpreted with caution. Clozapine and newer atypical drugs showed their adverse effect profile to be dissimilar: while clozapine produced more fatigue, hypersalivation, nausea, and orthostatic dizziness, new atypical drugs, with the exception of olanzapine, produced more extrapyramidal symptoms. The impact of these drugs and their effects on patients' day-to-day quality of life, service use, hospital admission, and pharmacoeconomics was not measured. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The equal effectiveness and tolerability of new atypical drugs in comparison with clozapine is not yet demonstrated. Lack of statistical power to determine the comparative efficacy and effectiveness of newer atypical drugs makes it difficult to judge whether newer drugs are more effective, less effective or equivalent. Trials of sufficient power, with longer duration, measuring clinically important outcomes, are needed to assess the true comparative clinical effectiveness, tolerability and cost effectiveness of newer drugs in relation to clozapine.