Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
1.
Eur J Clin Pharmacol ; 80(7): 1051-1060, 2024 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38536419

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Despite the evidence of higher effectiveness of psychological interventions for insomnia compared to pharmacological ones, drug prescriptions for insomnia remain frequent. This study has assessed patterns of prescriptions of BZDs for insomnia before and after the delivery of a training in psychological interventions to professionals working in the services of a Department of Mental Health in northern Italy. METHODS: The intervention consisted in two training sessions about psychological interventions for insomnia delivered to professionals of the participating services. The prevalence of users with a prescription of BZDs for insomnia in an index period after the delivery of the training was compared to the prevalence in an index period before the training. RESULTS: Among 727 people assessed for BZDs prescription at pre-intervention, 306 (42.1%, 95% CI 0.39-0.46) had a prescription, and 344 (49.2%, 95% CI 0.45-0.53) had a prescription among 699 people assessed at post-intervention, corresponding to a significant odds ratio of 1.33 to be prescribed with BZDs in the second index period compared to the first one. Psychological interventions were offered to a small group of patients. CONCLUSION: Prescribing attitudes of BZDs for insomnia were not modified after the training and delivery of a psychological intervention in a mental healthcare outpatient setting. Prescribing habits should be addressed more directly in training, and professionals should be more aware of risks of BZDs assumption. The failure in changing drug prescriptions in this study should prompt more real-world studies of the application of evidence-based strategies, particularly in outpatient mental health settings.


Asunto(s)
Benzodiazepinas , Servicios de Salud Mental , Trastornos del Inicio y del Mantenimiento del Sueño , Humanos , Trastornos del Inicio y del Mantenimiento del Sueño/tratamiento farmacológico , Italia , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto , Benzodiazepinas/uso terapéutico , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Prescripciones de Medicamentos/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano
2.
Health Policy ; 144: 105081, 2024 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38749354

RESUMEN

The shift of mental health care from mental institutions to community-based services has been implemented differentially throughout the EU. However, because a comprehensive overview of the current mental health provision in member states is lacking, it is challenging to compare services across nations. This study investigates the extent of implementation of community-based mental health services within the EU using data collected from the WHO Mental Health Atlas. Results show that, although great cross-country variation exists in the implementation of community-based services, mental hospitals remain the prominent model of care in most countries. A few countries endorsed a balanced care model, with the co-occurrence of community services and mental hospitals. However, missing data, low quality of data and different service definitions hamper the possibility of a thorough analysis of the status on deinstitutionalization. Although policies on the closing and downsizing of mental institutions have been endorsed by the EU, the strong presence of mental hospitals slows down the shift towards community-based mental health care. This study highlights the need for an international consensus on definitions and a harmonization of indicators on mental health services. Together with the commitment of member states to improve the quality of data reporting, leadership must emerge to ensure quality monitoring of mental health-related data, which will help advance research, policies and practices.


Asunto(s)
Servicios Comunitarios de Salud Mental , Unión Europea , Humanos , Servicios Comunitarios de Salud Mental/organización & administración , Hospitales Psiquiátricos/organización & administración , Política de Salud , Desinstitucionalización
3.
J Clin Med ; 13(7)2024 Apr 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38610838

RESUMEN

Background: Differences in survival between patients treated with antipsychotic monotherapy vs. polytherapy are debated. This study aimed to examine the association of antipsychotic polytherapy with 2-year all-cause mortality in a population-based cohort. Methods: Data were retrieved from healthcare databases of four local health units of Lombardy, Italy. Subjects aged 18-79 years who received continuous antipsychotic prescriptions in 2018 were identified. Overall survival among patients with antipsychotic monotherapy vs. polytherapy was compared. A multivariate Cox PH model was used to estimate the association between antipsychotic therapy, or antipsychotic use (continuous vs. non-continuous), and all-cause mortality. Adjustments were made for the presence of metabolic disturbances, total antipsychotic dosage amount (olanzapine equivalent doses), age, and sex. Results: A total of 49,875 subjects receiving at least one prescription of antipsychotics during 2018 were identified. Among the 33,221 patients receiving continuative antipsychotic prescriptions, 1958 (5.9%) experienced death from any cause at two years. Patients with continuous antipsychotic use had a 1.13-point increased mortality risk compared with non-continuous users. Patients treated with antipsychotic polytherapy showed an adjusted mortality risk increased by 17% (95% CI: 2%, 33%) compared to monotherapy. Conclusions: The study highlights the potential risks associated with antipsychotic polypharmacy, emphasizing the importance of optimizing drug prescriptions to improve patient safety and reduce mortality rates in individuals receiving antipsychotic therapy.

4.
EClinicalMedicine ; 69: 102491, 2024 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38384338

RESUMEN

Background: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is prevalent and disabling among older adults. Standing on its tolerability profile, vortioxetine might be a promising alternative to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in such a vulnerable population. Methods: We conducted a randomised, assessor- and statistician-blinded, superiority trial including older adults with MDD. The study was conducted between 02/02/2019 and 02/22/2023 in 11 Italian Psychiatric Services. Participants were randomised to vortioxetine or one of the SSRIs, selected according to common practice. Treatment discontinuation due to adverse events after six months was the primary outcome, for which we aimed to detect a 12% difference in favour of vortioxetine. The study was registered in the online repository clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03779789). Findings: The intention-to-treat population included 179 individuals randomised to vortioxetine and 178 to SSRIs. Mean age was 73.7 years (standard deviation 6.1), and 264 participants (69%) were female. Of those on vortioxetine, 78 (44%) discontinued the treatment due to adverse events at six months, compared to 59 (33%) of those on SSRIs (odds ratio 1.56; 95% confidence interval 1.01-2.39). Adjusted and per-protocol analyses confirmed point estimates in favour of SSRIs, but without a significant difference. With the exception of the unadjusted survival analysis showing SSRIs to outperform vortioxetine, secondary outcomes provided results consistent with a lack of substantial safety and tolerability differences between the two arms. Overall, no significant differences emerged in terms of response rates, depressive symptoms and quality of life, while SSRIs outperformed vortioxetine in terms of cognitive performance. Interpretation: As opposed to what was previously hypothesised, vortioxetine did not show a better tolerability profile compared to SSRIs in older adults with MDD in this study. Additionally, hypothetical advantages of vortioxetine on depression-related cognitive symptoms might be questioned. The study's statistical power and highly pragmatic design allow for generalisability to real-world practice. Funding: The study was funded by the Italian Medicines Agency within the "2016 Call for Independent Drug Research".

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA