Improvement of psychiatrists' clinical knowledge of the treatment guidelines for schizophrenia and major depressive disorders using the 'Effectiveness of Guidelines for Dissemination and Education in Psychiatric Treatment (EGUIDE)' project: A nationwide dissemination, education, and evaluation study.

AIM: Although treatment guidelines for pharmacological therapy for schizophrenia and major depressive disorder have been issued by the Japanese Societies of Neuropsychopharmacology and Mood Disorders, these guidelines have not been well applied by psychiatrists throughout the nation. To address this issue, we developed the 'Effectiveness of Guidelines for Dissemination and Education in Psychiatric Treatment (EGUIDE)' integrated education programs for psychiatrists to disseminate the clinical guidelines. Additionally, we conducted a systematic efficacy evaluation of the programs. METHODS: Four hundred thirteen out of 461 psychiatrists attended two 1-day educational programs based on the treatment guidelines for schizophrenia and major depressive disorder from October 2016 to March 2018. We measured the participants' clinical knowledge of the treatment guidelines using self-completed questionnaires administered before and after the program to assess the effectiveness of the programs for improving knowledge. We also examined the relation between the participants' demographics and their clinical knowledge scores. RESULTS: The clinical knowledge scores for both guidelines were significantly improved after the program. There was no correlation between clinical knowledge and participant demographics for the program on schizophrenia; however, a weak positive correlation was found between clinical knowledge and the years of professional experience for the program on major depressive disorder. CONCLUSION: Our results provide evidence that educational programs on the clinical practices recommended in guidelines for schizophrenia and major depressive disorder might effectively improve participants' clinical knowledge of the guidelines. These data are encouraging to facilitate the standardization of clinical practices for psychiatric disorders.

Cholesterol levels of Japanese dyslipidaemic patients with various comorbidities: BioBank Japan.

BACKGROUND: Controlling serum cholesterol is critical to prevent cardiovascular disease in patients with dyslipidaemia. Guidelines emphasise the need to select treatment for dyslipidaemia based on specific patient profiles; however, there is little information about the serum cholesterol levels of patients in each profile in Japan. Therefore, we aimed to describe the serum cholesterol levels and prevalence of uncontrolled cases in Japanese patients with dyslipidaemia. METHODS: We included data for patients with dyslipidaemia between 2003 and 2007 from the BioBank Japan Project (66 hospitals). Then, we reported their serum cholesterol levels by age, body mass index, glycaemic control (glycated haemoglobin A1c), blood pressure, smoking, drinking, comorbidity and medication profiles. RESULTS: We included 22,189 male and 21,545 female patients. The mean serum low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglyceride (TG) and non-HDL-C levels in males were 117.4 mg/dL, 51.0 mg/dL, 187.6 mg/dL and 153.6 mg/dL, respectively; the corresponding levels in females were 129.5 mg/dL, 60.5 mg/dL, 144.9 mg/dL and 157.9 mg/dL, respectively. In both males and females, the LDL-C levels were the highest in the following profiles: age 19-44 years, body mass index 18.5-22 kg/m2, glycated haemoglobin A1c <6.0%, never smoker, chronic respiratory disease as a comorbidity and no medication use. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide details of serum cholesterol levels by risk-factor profile in patients with dyslipidaemia and could add evidence of treatment decisions.

Risk of withdrawal of consent for treatment with long-acting injectable versus oral antipsychotics: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Despite the clinical importance of antipsychotic long-acting injections (LAIs) in the treatment of schizophrenia, their use may be limited by patients' reluctance to accept the injections. No studies to date have investigated whether patients are more likely to withdraw their consent to treatment with LAIs than to treatment with oral antipsychotics (OAPs). Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the risk of withdrawal of consent between the 2 routes of administration. METHODS: PubMed, the Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, and CINAHL were systematically searched. RCTs with open-label or rater-masked design that compared LAIs with OAPs were selected. Data on study discontinuation due to withdrawal of consent and/or loss to follow-up were extracted. RESULTS: A total of 16 studies (4815 patients) that met the study eligibility criteria were included in the meta-analysis. There was no significant difference between the LAI and OAP groups in the risk of cessation of treatment because of withdrawal of consent. Similarly, there was no significant difference in the risk of study discontinuation because of withdrawal of consent plus loss to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: These findings were unexpected and suggest that patients may not be more hesitant to continue LAIs than OAPs after consenting to or receiving treatment. Nevertheless, patients should be provided detailed explanations about the use of LAIs and a support system that encourages them to continue treatment.