[Study on how schizophrenic patients perceive treatment with injections in the deltoid muscle]. / Étude sur la perception du traitement injectable dans le muscle deltoïde par les patients souffrant de troubles schizophréniques.

UNLABELLED: Despite the advantages of antipsychotic treatments via the injectable route of administration, there are still reservations regarding this type of therapy, notably among health professionals. A survey conducted with patients suffering from schizophrenic disorders revealed the positive opinion that they had of their treatment. Another survey showed that nearly half of the patients preferred an injectable form, and two thirds felt they were cared for better, because of the injectable treatment. The slow release form of risperidone allows a choice between two injection sites: the deltoid muscle or the gluteal muscle. A recent study showed the satisfaction of the health professionals towards this novel form. The survey presented here was aimed at collecting the opinion of patients regarding the possibility of choosing the injection site, and the changes it would make. OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: The survey was carried out by the BVA Institute during the first half of 2011. The interviews with the schizophrenic patients, followed-up as out patients and treated with long lasting antipsychotics (n=281), were conducted face to face at the hospital by BVA interviewers specialised in the field of health, without the presence of any health professionals. A total of 32 centres participated in the survey; 38% of the interviews took place in the Paris area and 62% in various regions. RESULTS: Different dimensions were analysed. (1) The perception of injectable treatment was largely positive: among all the patients, 75% claimed they currently felt better once they had started the injectable treatment. (2) The choice of the injection site appeared important to a majority of patients (70% of the total sample; 79% of patients had experienced both sites of injection), 56% claimed that it was legitimate that they be given the choice and they felt that they were thus able to participate in their treatment (58%), their treatment was more acceptable (54%), and they found that their relationship with the doctor or nurse was enhanced (53%). (3) The preference regarding the injection site went to the deltoid muscle, among those who had experienced both sites. (4) The perception of the injection sites confirms this preference, the positive qualifications often being associated with the deltoid site, and the negative qualifications with the gluteal site. CONCLUSION: The survey presented here could contribute in convincing the health professionals to propose the choice to patients between the two injection sites in order to improve their compliance to treatment. Patients would therefore play a role in the choice of their treatment and hence become more involved in the follow-up.

[Insight in schizophrenia: assessment of 31 patients with different scales]. / Evaluation de la conscience du trouble chez le schizophrène dans une cohorte de 31 patients.

INTRODUCTION: Insight is more than frequently altered in schizophrenia, rupture of treatment being one the most known consequences of this impairment. Two different types of scales can be used to assess consciousness: self-questionnaires directly filled-in by the patient or questionnaires assessed by a psychiatrist after an interview. AIM OF THE STUDIES: The goal of this study was first to assess insight in schizophrenic patients with these two different types of scales and then try to find a link between insight impairment and schizophrenic symptoms. The self-questionnaire was the Marks et al. Self Appraisal of Illness Questionnaire (SAIQ) [Schizophr Res 45 (2000) 203-11], 17 items finally giving four scores (consciousness of illness, consequences of schizophrenia, need for treatment and worrying about illness) plus a total score of insight. The other questionnaire was the Amador Scale for assessment of Unawareness of Mental Disease [Amador XF, Strauss DH. The scale to assess unawareness of mental disorder (SUMD). Columbia University and New-York State Psychiatric Institute;1990], consisting in an interview with a psychiatrist who finally assesses four dimensions (consciousness of illness, symptoms, need for treatment and consequences of illness) plus a total score. In addition to these scores, Amador's scale gives the opportunity to score attribution a patient gives to illness for his symptoms. PATIENTS: Thirty-one patients whose schizophrenia diagnosis had been previously made according to DSM-IV criteria were included. Half were outpatients, half inpatients. Drug prescriptions were controlled; all of the patients being medicated with an antipsychotic, a benzodiazepine and a sleep inducer. They were all assessed by the two scales previously mentioned and the Positive And Negative Syndrome Scale [Kay SR, Opler LA, Fiszbein A. Positive and negative syndrome scale. Traduction de Lepine JL. In: Guelfi JD, éditeur. Evaluation clinique standardisée, tome II. Castres : Editions médicales Pierre Fabre;1996]. RESULTS: Total scores of insight scales were significantly correlated (p<0.001). For each questionnaire, the four different scores were independent from each other (p<0.001). There was no correlation found between insight scales and schizophrenic symptoms intensity. CONCLUSION: Considering symptom attribution, being unconscious of a symptom and being enable to attribute it to schizophrenia were linked, which could refer to Frith's theory of schizophrenia [Frith CD. Neuropsychologie de la schizophrénie. Psychiatrie ouverte. Paris: PUF;1996 (208p.)] and attribution impairment as a main dysfunction. The two different types of scales seem to be effective. The significant correlation between them suggests they assess the same dimension. This preliminary study will be followed by a validation study of the french translation of the SAIQ.

[Clinical impact of aripiprazole in patients suffering from schizophrenia]. / Aripiprazole: à propos de cas cliniques chez des patients souffrant de schizophrénie ou d'un trouble schizo-affectif.

INTRODUCTION: In this study, we present seven case reports concerning patients suffering from schizophrenia or schizo-affective disorders, treated by aripiprazole. STUDY DESIGN: Through these patient case reports, we have attempted to highlight the specificities of aripiprazole's action on schizophrenic symptoms, especially in the cognitive dimension. In acting as a regulator more than as a brake on the translation messages between neurons, aripiprazole does not increase cognitive disorders, but may have a procognitive affect. RESULTS: We particularly noticed an improvement in attention abilities, both in selective attention - in order to take into account the context of the situation - and in sustained attention allowing patients to maintain a stable and appropriate level of efficiency while performing an activity. Case reports (n 2, n 3 and n 5) also seem to show the ability of aripiprazole to improve working memory: indeed, abilities of patients to maintain and recall information regarding different cognitive activities required in rehabilitation psychiatric care were noticed with aripiprazole while they were not with previous antipsychotic drugs used in the same patients. DISCUSSION: Our sample, although too small for global consideration, suggests that aripiprazole provides stimulating properties for schizophrenic patients including those with primary deficient syndrome. This action, probably through cognitive improvement, needs some clarification in more precisely defining deficit features as juxtaposed by the classical criteria used on the SANS-SAPS and PANSS scales. Finally, we should stress aripiprazole's rapidity of effect. In half the cases, the reported improvement in our patients occurred during the first week of treatment. Hence, the patient should be informed of the short time-span effect for aripiprazole, in order to prevent the emergence of symptoms due to the rapid switch of medication and eventual side effects. CONCLUSION: Aripiprazole acts as a partial agonist of D2 receptors as well as a partial agonist of 5HT1A and an antagonist of 5HT2A. This drug constitutes the first that permits regulation of both the dopamine and serotonine systems: dopamine activity is blocked when D2 receptors are over-stimulated and increased when D2 receptors require stimulation; on the other hand, in the cortical region, the inactivation of 5HT2A allows for a release of dopamine firing, whereas in the striatum where the 5HT2A receptors density is increased, their blockage inhibits dopamine release and limits extrapyramidal symptoms. In addition, the synergy between 5HT1A antagonism and 5HT2A antagonism seems to provide aripiprazole with both anxiolytic and affective properties. Finally, the absence of an affinity for histamine, muscarinic and adrenergic alpha-1 receptors limits the side effects compared to other antipsychotic drugs.

[Ten years of clinical experience with clozapine about 170 patients]. / Dix ans d'expérience clinique de la clozapine portant sur 170 patients.

The authors describe a clinical trial of 170 patients who received clozapine over a ten year period between September 1989 and September 1999. It is a retrospective study, describing individual responses. Each patient was his own control before and with treatment. The study also compared individuals within the group of patients whose treatment was stopped and those whose treatment was continuing at the time of the study. Data was collected by analysing all patients' records and by direct enquiry of prescribers. Diagnosis was according to DSM IV criteria. Assessment included: socio-epidemiological data (sex, age, marital status and family situation, education, military and professional status, level of benefits and social support); data related to the illness (age of onset, age at first contact with a psychiatrist, diagnosis, level of hospital contact); data concerning prescriptions of drugs (indications, average dose, duration of treatment, side effects, reason for stopping and other drugs taken at the same time); 170 patients were prescribed clozapine: 96 of them were continuing to take clozapine at the time of the study while 74 patients had stopped. The characteristics of the two groups are described. They show the severity of the illnesses concerned: early onset of illness and early psychiatric care, the absence in many patients of a partner or family, their low level of employment, high dependence on social assistance. Concerning diagnostic criteria, the range of diagnoses included mostly paranoid schizophrenia, then unclassified schizophrenia then schizoaffective disorders. The indication of clozapine prescription was in the majority of the cases (87%) an inefficiency of classical neuroleptic therapy. The average dose was 401 mg per day: 388 mg for the group continuing treatment; 417 for the group which had stopped their treatment. For the patients who continued taking clozapine, the average time of treatment was just over 4 years, with a maximum of 110 months. The tolerance of clozapine was good, with 35% not suffering any side effects. Neutropenia was the commonest side effect (4.1% - a higher incidence than previously reported with one case only of agranulocytosis (0.59%). The other adverse effects were in accordance with known data: sedation affected 22.4% of patients; hypersalivation 13.5%; postural hypotension 7.6%; malocclusion 7.6%; weight gain (>5 kg) 7.1%. Treatment was stopped for side effects in 17.1% of patients; for ineffectiveness in 14.7% and 3% of patients died during treatment (their death attributed to clozapine) from seizures, intestinal obstruction or agranulocytosis. Clozapine significantly reduced the need for other associated psychotropic drugs. 25.3% of all patients were on monotherapy when on clozapine compared with 6.5% before (31.2% compared with 3.1% for those patients continuing treatment). The need for supplementary medication to reduce side effects was much less. However 22% of patients taking clozapine at the time of the study are still on an anticholinergic drug. On the basis of the analysis of 5 successive terms of treatment lasting 12 months, we have shown that for each patient: clozapine significantly reduces the length of hospitalisation compared with standard neuroleptics; it allows for out patient management and continuing integration in the community; the critical length of treatment for the group of patients studied with regard to the need for hospitalisation is 18 months. For patients whose treatment with clozapine was stopped, we noted that with the continued input from the team of carers even after clozapine was stopped, patients who had been seriously ill for long period of time continued to improve.