Comorbid opioid use is undertreated among forensic patients with schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Substance use disorders are associated with poorer clinical outcomes in patients with schizophrenia. There is no specific treatment for amphetamine or cannabis use disorder, but methadone and buprenorphine are used as replacement therapy in the treatment of opioid dependence. Our aim was to study whether patients with schizophrenia have received opioid replacement therapy for their opioid use disorder. METHODS: The study sample consisted of 148 individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia who were in involuntary psychiatric treatment as forensic patients in Finland in 2012. The proportion of the study sample with comorbid opioid use disorder having received opioid replacement therapy prior to their forensic psychiatric treatment was compared to the available information of opioid dependent patients in general. The data were collected from forensic examination statements, patient files and other medical registers retrospectively. RESULTS: Of the study sample, 15.6% (23/148) had a history of opioid use disorder, of whom 8.7% (2/23) had received opioid replacement treatment (95% confidence interval (Cl): 1.1-28.0), even though opioid use disorder had been diagnosed in the treatment system. According the available information the corresponding proportion among patients with opioid use disorder and using substance use disorder services was 30.4% (565/1860, 95% Cl: 28.3-32.5). The fraction of patients receiving opioid replacement therapy was significantly lower among patients with schizophrenia (p = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: Opioid replacement therapy was seldom used among schizophrenia patients who were later ordered to involuntary forensic psychiatric treatment. More attention should be paid to the possible use of opioids when planning treatment for patients with schizophrenia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Our study is not a randomized controlled trial (but a register-based study); thus the trial registration is not applicable.

Opioid abuse and hospitalization rates in patients with schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Substance abuse worsens the course of schizophrenia, but it is not known whether or not there are differences between specific substances concerning their association with the hospitalizations of patients with schizophrenia. AIMS: The primary aims of this study were to examine the possible associations between amphetamine, cannabis, and opioid abuse, and the risk of hospitalizations among patients with schizophrenia. METHODS: The study population consisted of 146 patients with ICD-defined schizophrenia from two different geographical sites in Finland, and it included both inpatients and outpatients. Data were collected retrospectively from the patients' medical files. Substance abuse was defined as either harmful use or dependence according to ICD-10. RESULTS: The cumulative prevalence of substance abuse was 10.9% (16/146) for cannabis, 8.9% (13/146) for amphetamine, and 4.1% (6/146) for opioids. Among patients with schizophrenia and abuse of any substance, the number of hospitalizations was about 1.5-fold when compared to those without substance abuse. The incidence rate ratio for hospitalizations was 2.9 (95% CI 2.47-3.63) for opioids, 2.0 (1.71-2.41) for amphetamine, and 1.6 (1.33-1.84) for cannabis, when compared with no abuse of each substance. The risk of hospitalizations was significantly higher for opioids when compared with amphetamine (p < 0.001) or cannabis (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Harmful use or dependence of opioids among patients with schizophrenia is associated with significantly higher risk of hospitalizations than either harmful use or dependence of amphetamine or cannabis.

Previous forensic mental examination is a useful marker indicating effective violence relapse prevention among psychotic patients.

BACKGROUND: Patients with schizophrenia have an increased risk of violent behavior. AIMS: The aim of this study was to find predictive indicators of high risk of violent behavior among outpatients with psychosis. METHODS: A total of 206 individuals were involuntarily ordered to hospital treatment as forensic patients after a forensic mental examination in Finland from 1995-1999. The information was collected from the registers of the National Authority for Medicolegal Affairs, and was obtained from 194 persons of which 184 had been accused of a violent crime. RESULTS: Twenty percent (22/110) of those forensic patients, who had received a psychosis diagnosis before the index crime, had previously undergone a forensic examination. This subgroup was 12% of the total study population (22/184), which is about 300 times higher than expected (i.e. if no risk increase assumed). Ten of the 22 persons in this subgroup had been committed in forensic psychiatric inpatient care and later discharged. The same number of persons had been sentenced to prison and subsequently released after the previous forensic mental examination. CONCLUSIONS: While primary prevention of crime for the larger population of all patients with psychosis is not feasible, secondary prevention (prevention of reoffending) might be possible by focusing on the small subgroup, which had undergone a previous forensic mental examination. Obligatory follow-up and treatment in outpatient care would probably decrease recidivistic offending among discharged forensic psychiatric patients and among those offenders found not guilty by reason of insanity but not considered to fulfill criteria for involuntary hospital treatment.

The substance use among forensic psychiatric patients.

OBJECTIVES: The primary goal of this study was to examine the relative differences in the use of illegal substances (i.e., amphetamine, cannabis, opiates) among forensic patients who have committed a violent crime compared with the general population. The aim was also to find out if there were differences in substance use among forensic versus nonforensic patients with psychosis diagnosis. METHODS: The study population consisted of 190 persons, who were involuntarily ordered to hospital treatment as forensic patients in Finland. The information was compared with data from the national hospital discharge register. These results were also compared with national statistics from the general population. RESULTS: Among forensic patients, the lifetime prevalence of cannabis use was 2-fold, amphetamine use 40-fold, and opiate use over 60-fold higher than estimated from the general population in Finland. Cannabis use was 1.5-fold more common than amphetamine use among forensic patients and 1.3-fold more common among nonforensic patients. The prevalences of cannabis-related diagnoses were 4.7- and 3.7-fold more common than opiate use among forensic and nonforensic patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Cannabis, amphetamine, and opiate use are associated with an increased risk of becoming a forensic psychiatric patient, but no substantial differences were observed among patients with psychosis diagnosis in the relative risk increase for cannabis versus amphetamine versus opiate use, indicating that none of these drugs are uniquely associated with violent offending among mentally ill.