ABSTRACT
Migration rates increase globally and require an adaption of national mental health services to the needs of persons with migration background. Therefore, we aimed to identify differences between persons with and without migratory background regarding (1) treatment satisfaction, (2) needed and received mental healthcare and (3) utilization of mental healthcare.In the context of a cross-sectional multicenter study, inpatients and day hospital patients of psychiatric settings in Southern Germany with severe affective and non-affective psychoses were included. Patients' satisfaction with and their use of mental healthcare services were assessed by VSSS-54 and CSSRI-EU; patients' needs were measured via CAN-EU.In total, 387 participants (migratory background: n = 72; 19%) provided sufficient responses for analyses. Migrant patients were more satisfied with the overall treatment in the past year compared to non-migrant patients. No differences between both groups were identified in met and unmet treatment needs and use of supply services (psychiatric, psychotherapeutic, and psychosocial treatment).Despite a comparable degree of met and unmet treatment needs and mental health service use among migrants and non-migrants, patients with migration background showed higher overall treatment satisfaction compared to non-migrants. The role of sociocultural and migrant-related factors may explain our findings.
Subject(s)
Mental Health Services , Transients and Migrants , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , National Health Programs , Patient Satisfaction , Personal SatisfactionABSTRACT
PURPOSE: People with a severe mental illness (SMI) are at particular risk of occupational exclusion. Among the approaches to occupational rehabilitation, supported employment (SE) has been proven to be the most effective. A requirement to enter SE-programs is that individuals must want to seek competitive employment. The aim of this work is to investigate the relationship between serious mental illness and the desire to work including potential predictors. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional observational study of patients with SMI aged 18-65 years (n = 397). Patients were interviewed by trained staff using standardised instruments. The relationship between potential predictors and a strong preference for employment were analysed using a hierarchic binary logistic regression model. RESULTS: Only about one-quarter (27.9%) of SMI patients is in competitive employment. Another quarter is unemployed (25.9%). Results show that the desire for competitive employment is strong among more than half of the SMI patients. Among the unemployed, two-thirds express a strong desire for work. These individuals are an ideal target group for SE interventions. Comorbid chronic physical illness, diagnosis, and the subjectively judged ability to work are associated with the desire for work. CONCLUSION: Our data confirm a substantial exclusion of individuals with SMI from the workforce. In general, care needs for workplace interventions are not being met and leave much room for improvement. In addition to employment status, the desire for work should be routinely assessed. STUDY REGISTRATION: The study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) ( https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00015801 ) and under the WHO-Platform "International Clinical Trials Registry Platform" (ICTRP) ( https://apps.who.int/trialsearch/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=DRKS00015801 ) under the registration number DRKS00015801 before the start of recruitment (Registration date: 21.02.2019).
Subject(s)
Employment, Supported , Mental Disorders , Mentally Ill Persons , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Middle AgedABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Peer support is playing an increasing role in the treatment of severely mentally ill people. International findings are available on its effectiveness. However, little is known about knowledge, use and benefit assessment in Germany. This paper addresses this question and presents results from an observational study with 10 participating clinics in southern Germany. METHODS: As part of the observational cross-sectional study with people with severe mental illness (IMPPETUS, N=359), sociodemographic and illness- and treatment-associated data were collected by trained study staff between March 2019 and September 2019. Binary logistic regression was used to analyse a possible association with peer support use. RESULTS: 38% (N=138) of respondents reported knowledge about the possibility of peer support; 15% (N=55) affirmed its use. Use of peer support varied across sites (between 6.5 and 37.5%) and was associated with household income. Significantly less frequent use of peer support was among those with high versus low household income (OR=0.20 [95% CI: 0.06-0.68], p=0.01). Of respondents with peer support use (N=55), 78% reported perceiving peer support to be helpful or highly helpful. DISCUSSION: Peer support not only proves to be effective under study conditions with regard to various outcomes, but is also assessed as beneficial under routine conditions in a defined care region by the majority of users. However, only a few respondents knew and used the possibility of peer support. CONCLUSION: In order to implement peer support more strongly, information about this kind of service should be provided more effectively and a dialogue about successful implementation experiences should be initiated on a regional level.
Subject(s)
Mental Disorders , Peer Group , Counseling , Cross-Sectional Studies , Germany , Humans , Mental Disorders/therapyABSTRACT
This report presents the rationale and design of a multi-center clinical trial that examines the efficacy and safety of antipsychotic combination treatment in acutely ill schizophrenia patients compared to antipsychotic monotherapy. Antipsychotic combination treatment is common in clinical practice worldwide, despite clinical guidelines generally not recommending such practice due to lacking evidence for its efficacy and safety. Olanzapine has a related chemical structure and comparable receptor-binding profile as clozapine, which demonstrated superior efficacy in combination studies, but has a more unfavorable side-effect profile compared to olanzapine. Amisulpride and olanzapine have shown promising therapeutic efficacy in meta-analyses in monotherapy for people with schizophrenia. Combining amisulpride and olanzapine, complementary receptor-binding properties may enhance efficacy and possibly reduce (or at least not augment) side effects due to the different receptor profiles and metabolization pathways. Accordingly, we hypothesize that patients treated with amisulpride plus olanzapine show greater improvement on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total score after 8 weeks versus either monotherapy. A randomized, double-blind controlled trial is performed at 16 German centers comparing flexibly dosed monotherapy of oral amisulpride (400-800 mg/day), and olanzapine (10-20 mg/day) and amisulpride-olanzapine co-treatment. Sample size was calculated to be n = 101 per treatment arm, assuming an effect size of 0.500 and a two-sided alpha = 0.025 and beta = 0.90. Recruitment for this trial started in June 2012. Until December 2018, 328 patients have been randomized. Trial conduct has been extended to reach the projected sample size. Publication of the study results is expected in 2019 informing an evidence-based recommendation regarding specific antipsychotic combination treatment.
Subject(s)
Amisulpride/pharmacology , Antipsychotic Agents/pharmacology , Olanzapine/pharmacology , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/methods , Research Design , Schizophrenia/drug therapy , Acute Disease , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Amisulpride/administration & dosage , Amisulpride/adverse effects , Antipsychotic Agents/administration & dosage , Antipsychotic Agents/adverse effects , Double-Blind Method , Drug Therapy, Combination , Humans , Middle Aged , Multicenter Studies as Topic/methods , Olanzapine/administration & dosage , Olanzapine/adverse effects , Young AdultABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The influence of guideline recommendations and other factors on the utilization of psychosocial interventions in people with severe mental illness was examined. METHODS: Data from a cross-sectional study of 397 people with severe mental illness were analysed descriptively. RESULTS: Patients are less likely to receive therapies with a strong recommendation compared to other levels of recommendation. Various other factors are diffusely associated with utilization rates, but no ubiquitous predictors could be identified across all therapies. CONCLUSION: Current practice in the use of psychosocial interventions does not follow guideline recommendation strength. Interventions with strong recommendations are probably not available across services. Consequently, routine practice is not able to follow guideline recommendations according to their strength. Other consistent predictors could not be identified.
Subject(s)
Mental Disorders , Mentally Ill Persons , Humans , Cross-Sectional Studies , Germany , Mental Disorders/therapyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Extensive research has been undertaken to predict treatment response (TR) to antipsychotics. Most studies address TR to antipsychotics in general and as monotherapy, however, it is unknown whether patients might respond favourably to a combination of antipsychotics. AIMS: This study aimed to identify differential predictors for TR to monotherapy with amisulpride or olanzapine compared to a combination of antipsychotics. METHODS: Post-hoc analysis was conducted of data collected from the COMBINE-study, a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial. Demographic and disease-related measures were gathered at baseline to predict TR after eight weeks defined by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale. Missing values were accounted for by a random replacement procedure. Attrition effects and multicollinearity were analysed and sets of logistic regression models were calculated for different treatment groups. RESULTS: Of the 321 randomized patients, 201 completed procedures until week eight and 197 were included in the analyses. For all treatment groups, early TR after two weeks and high subjective well-being under antipsychotics at baseline were robust predictors for TR. The propensity for early side effects also indicated a higher risk of later non-response. Specific parameter estimates were rather similar between treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Early TR, drug-related subjective well-being, and early side effect propensity evolved as predictors for later TR whether to monotherapy or combination strategy. Accordingly, due to a lack of differential predictors, early and close monitoring of targeted and unwanted effects is indicated to guide respective treatment decisions.
Subject(s)
Amisulpride , Antipsychotic Agents , Drug Therapy, Combination , Olanzapine , Schizophrenia , Humans , Amisulpride/administration & dosage , Amisulpride/pharmacology , Olanzapine/administration & dosage , Antipsychotic Agents/administration & dosage , Antipsychotic Agents/adverse effects , Schizophrenia/drug therapy , Female , Male , Adult , Double-Blind Method , Middle Aged , Treatment Outcome , Acute Disease , Young Adult , Sulpiride/analogs & derivatives , Sulpiride/administration & dosage , Sulpiride/adverse effects , Psychiatric Status Rating ScalesABSTRACT
The German Association for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy (DGPPN) has committed itself to establish a prospective national cohort of patients with major psychiatric disorders, the so-called DGPPN-Cohort. This project will enable the scientific exploitation of high-quality data and biomaterial from psychiatric patients for research. It will be set up using harmonised data sets and procedures for sample generation and guided by transparent rules for data access and data sharing regarding the central research database. While the main focus lies on biological research, it will be open to all kinds of scientific investigations, including epidemiological, clinical or health-service research.
Subject(s)
Cooperative Behavior , Mental Disorders , Psychiatry , Psychotherapy/methods , Psychotherapy/standards , Cohort Studies , Female , Germany , Humans , Male , Mental Disorders/diagnosis , Mental Disorders/psychology , Mental Disorders/therapy , Societies, MedicalABSTRACT
Cognitive impairment often occurs in major depressive disorder (MDD). Studies suggest that these cognitive deficits may be associated with inflammatory biomarkers, but data are limited. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the relationship between 48 peripheral blood cytokines and cognitive performance in patients with severe depressive disorder. One hundred consecutive hospitalized adult patients with severe depression who participated in the Depression long-term Augsburg (DELTA) study were included in the present analysis. To test working memory (WM) the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) IV and to assess interference control (IC) the Stroop Color and Word Test (SCWT) were performed. The serum concentrations of the biomarkers were measured using the Bio-Plex Pro™ Human Cytokine Screening Panel 1. Multiple linear regression models adjusted for possible confounders were fitted to examine associations. WM was impaired in 11% of the patients. IC was impaired in 1%-3% of the cases depending on the subtest. Eotaxin, IL-1ß, IL-4, MCP-1, G-CSF, and PGF-BB were negatively associated with the WM. Eotaxin, IL-1ß, IL-4, IL-16, IL-18, MCP-1, G-CSF, SCF, and MIP-1α were negatively associated with IC. None of these associations remained significant after adjustment for multiple testing. The present study identified eotaxin, IL-1ß, IL-4, IL-16, IL-18, MCP-1, G-CSF, SCF, PGF-BB and MIP-1α as being associated with cognitive performance. After confirmation of these results in further studies, these cytokines may be potential targets for new treatments.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to describe atypical dyskinesias (AtypDs) occurring during treatment with antipsychotic drugs (APDs). AtypDs are dyskinesias showing either an unusual temporal relationship between onset of treatment and start of the adverse drug reaction (ADR) or an unusual presentation of clinical symptoms. METHODS: Data on the utilisation of APDs and reports of severe APD-induced AtypDs were collected using data from the observational pharmacovigilance programme - 'Arzneimittelsicherheit in der Psychiatrie (English: drug safety in psychiatry)' (AMSP) - from 1993 to 2016. RESULTS: A total of 495,615 patients were monitored, of which 333,175 were treated with APDs. Sixty-seven cases (0.020%) of severe AtypDs under treatment with APDs were registered. The diagnoses of schizophrenic disorders as well as organic mental disorders were related to significantly higher rates of AtypDs. Second-generation antipsychotic drugs (SGAs) showed slightly higher rates of AtypDs (0.024%) than high-potency (0.011%) or low-potency first-generation antipsychotic drugs (FGAs; 0.006%). In 41 cases (61.2%), two or more drugs were found to cause AtypDs. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates that AtypDs are rare ADRs. SGAs may have a higher risk for the occurrence of AtypDs than FGAs. Clinicians should be aware of this ADR and patients should be monitored and examined carefully.
Subject(s)
Antipsychotic Agents , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions , Dyskinesias , Schizophrenia , Antipsychotic Agents/adverse effects , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/epidemiology , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/etiology , Dyskinesias/drug therapy , Humans , Pharmacovigilance , Schizophrenia/drug therapyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Employment is of great importance as it is associated with various positive effects. Individuals with severe mental illness (SMI) are often excluded from competitive employment. Current data on employment of individuals with mental illness are rare, and influencing factors are under-researched. The present study examines possible predictors of competitive employment among individuals with SMI. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional and multicentered study of 300 individuals with SMI aged 18 to 65 years. The following inclusion criteria were used: (I) diagnosis of schizophrenia, schizotypal and delusional disorders (ICD-10 F2x), or affective disorders (ICD-10 F3x), (II) duration of psychiatric illness ≥ 2 years, and (III) substantial impact of illness on social functioning. Participants were interviewed by trained staff using standardised instruments. The relationship between potential predictors (age, sex, education, marital status, living situation, migration background, psychosocial functioning, age at first mental problem, physical illness, work ability) and employment was analysed using a hierarchic binary logistic regression model. RESULTS: Only one-third (34%) of participants were competitively employed. Almost one-third were unemployed (30%), and 28% reported early retirement due to mental illness. Psychosocial functioning was positively associated with competitive employment (OR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.05 - 1.13, p < 0.001); concurrent chronic physical illness was negatively associated with competitive employment (OR = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.21 - 0.71, p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Findings confirm a high risk of exclusion from competitive employment among individuals with SMI. Nonetheless, a substantial proportion of individuals are employed. Findings call for efforts to maintain or enhance workforce participation among individuals with SMI. A special focus should be placed on improving physical health and strengthening psychosocial functioning. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) under the registration number DRKS00015801 before the start of recruitment (Registration date: 21.02.2019).
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Combining antipsychotics is common in schizophrenia treatment, despite evidence-based guidelines generally not recommending such practice. Otherwise, evidence remains inconclusive, especially regarding specific combinations. The trial aimed to test whether a combination of amisulpride plus olanzapine is more effective than either intervention as a monotherapy. METHODS: A multicentre, 16-week, randomised, double-blind, controlled trial was done at 16 psychiatric in-patient centres throughout Germany. Inclusion criteria were adults aged 18-65 years with non-first episode schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder and with a Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score of at least 70 and at least two items of the positive symptoms subscale rated at least 4. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 16 weeks of treatment with either amisulpride plus olanzapine, amisulpride plus placebo, or olanzapine plus placebo (1:1:1), and block randomisation was stratified by study site. To keep patients and investigators masked throughout the duration of the trial, amisulpride, olanzapine, and placebo were administered as identical capsules. Flexibly dosed monotherapy of oral amisulpride (amisulpride plus placebo, 200-800 mg per day) or olanzapine (olanzapine plus placebo, 5-20 mg per day) was compared with a combination of amisulpride plus olanzapine. The primary outcome was symptom reduction measured by the PANSS total score after 8 weeks, in the modified intention-to-treat population (all patients randomly assigned to an intervention and receiving at least one study drug dose). As determined a priori, group differences were examined by t tests (Bonferroni-Holm-adjustment) followed by pre-planned Bayesian analyses as well as imputation methods based on mixed models to account for missing values and post-hoc ANCOVA adjusting for PANSS baseline scores. The study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01609153; the German Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00003603; and the European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials Database, EudraCT-No. 2011-002463-20. FINDINGS: Between June 15, 2012, and Dec 15, 2018, 13 692 patients were assessed for eligibility. 13 364 patients were excluded (including for not meeting inclusion criteria, declining to participate, or inappropriate reasons for changing pharmacological treatment), and 328 were then randomly assigned to an intervention group. 112 patients were randomly assigned to receive amisulpride plus olanzapine, 109 were randomly assigned to receive amisulpride plus placebo, and 107 were randomly assigned to receive olanzapine plus placebo. 321 patients were analysed for the primary outcome in the modified intention-to-treat population after exclusion of screening failures and patients who did not receive the intervention (110 for amisulpride plus olanzapine, 109 for amisulpride plus placebo, and 102 for olanzapine plus placebo). Among the 321 patients who were randomly assigned to intervention groups and analysed for the primary outcome, 229 (71%) were male, 92 (29%) were female; the mean age was 40·2 years (SD 11·7); and 296 (92%) were White and 25 (8%) were classified as other ethnicity. PANSS total score improved significantly more at 8 weeks in the amisulpride plus olanzapine group (-29·6 [SD 14·5]) than in the olanzapine plus placebo group (-24·1 [13·4], p=0·049, Cohen's d=0·396). A significant difference was not observed in reduction of PANSS total score between the amisulpride and olanzapine group compared with the amisulpride and placebo group (-25·2 [SD 15·9], p=0·095, Cohen's d=0·29). After 8 weeks and 16 weeks, sexual dysfunction, weight, and waist circumference increase were significantly higher for patients receiving amisulpride plus olanzapine than for those receiving amisulpride plus placebo, with no differences in serious adverse events. Two patients died during study participation; one randomly assigned to the amisulpride plus olanzapine group, and one assigned to the olanzapine plus placebo group (both assessed with no relation to treatment). INTERPRETATION: The advantages of amisulpride plus olanzapine have to be weighed against a higher propensity for side-effects. The use of this specific combination therapy could be an alternative to monotherapy in certain clinical situations, but side-effects should be considered. FUNDING: German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.
Subject(s)
Schizophrenia , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Amisulpride/adverse effects , Bayes Theorem , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Olanzapine/therapeutic use , Schizophrenia/drug therapy , Treatment Outcome , Young AdultABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) has been associated with various antipsychotic drugs (APDs). Comparative studies between individual APDs are largely not available. METHODS: Antipsychotic drug utilisation data and reports of severe antipsychotic DILI were assessed by using data from an observational pharmacovigilance programme-Arzneimittelsicherheit in der Psychiatrie (AMSP)-during the period 1993-2016. RESULTS: Of the 333,175 patients treated with APDs, a total of 246 (0.07%) events of severe DILI were identified. Phenothiazines were associated with significantly higher rates of severe DILI (0.03%, 95% CI = 0.02-0.04) than thioxanthenes (0.01%, 95% CI = 0.00-0.02) or butyrophenones (0.01%, 95% CI = 0.00-0.01). Among individual drugs, olanzapine (0.12%, 95% CI = 0.10-0.16), perazine (0.09%, 95% CI = 0.05-0.15) and clozapine (0.09%, 95% CI = 0.10-0.12 ranked highest. In 78 cases (31.7%), combination therapies with antipsychotic and antidepressant drugs or with two or more APDs were considered responsible. Male sex and a diagnosis of mania were associated with significantly higher rates of severe DILI while older patients (≥65 years old) were significantly less often affected. CONCLUSIONS: In the present analysis of a representative psychiatric inpatient cohort, olanzapine, perazine, and clozapine were the most common individual APDs associated with severe DILI.
Subject(s)
Antipsychotic Agents , Chemical and Drug Induced Liver Injury , Clozapine , Aged , Antidepressive Agents , Antipsychotic Agents/adverse effects , Chemical and Drug Induced Liver Injury/epidemiology , Chemical and Drug Induced Liver Injury/etiology , Humans , Male , PharmacovigilanceABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Depressive disorders are very common diseases entailing a great burden on affected people. However, comprehensive information on long-term disease course in patients with severe depression is lacking so far. The objectives of the DELTA study are to examine long-term outcomes and their predicting factors, to assess clinical response of antidepressant pharmacotherapy by applying therapeutic drug monitoring, to identify predictors of therapeutic non-response, to describe the long-term healthcare utilisation and to investigate the role of biomarkers in disease course. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A cohort study including all adult hospitalised cases (age range 18 to 75 years) of severe major depression who are admitted to the Bezirkskrankenhaus Augsburg is established. It is planned to include 300 patients. During the hospital stay, information is gathered through personal interview, self-administered questionnaires, cognitive tests and chart review. Furthermore, biomaterials are collected. After hospital discharge, patients are repeatedly re-examined over time (3, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months) to collect information about mortality, relapse, depression severity, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), perceived stigma, cognitive functions, diet, physical activity, treatment and healthcare utilisation. Follow-up blood samples are collected to determine therapeutic drug levels. The primary study aim is to investigate long-term therapeutic response, survival, relapse, HRQOL and cognitive functions. Survival time and time to relapse or re-hospitalisation will be analysed using Cox regression models. Changes of HRQOL, depressive symptoms and cognitive functions over time will be examined using generalised linear regression models for repeated measures or mixed models. Correlates of the disease course will be modelled using suitable generalised linear, mixed, estimating equation and growth curve models. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (date of approval: 23 October 2017, reference number: 17-625). Study results will be presented at scientific conferences and published in peer-reviewed scientific journals.