Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 109
Filtrar
1.
Schizophr Res ; 2020 Apr 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32269005

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To determine if a single baseline adherence assessment (Brief Adherence Rating Scale [BARS]) could identify patients who are likely to respond to long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotic treatment. METHOD: The current secondary analysis included a sub-sample of adult outpatients (N = 176) with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who participated in the "A Comparison of Long-Acting Injectable Medications for Schizophrenia (ACLAIMS)" trial and had a baseline BARS assessment and a baseline and month 3 Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) rating. The main outcome was LAI treatment response, defined as a ≥ 20% decrease (baseline to month 3) on the PANSS total score. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) and Area Under the Curve (AUC) analysis was conducted to determine the optimal cutpoint of baseline BARS adherence in discriminating LAI treatment response at month 3. A logistic mixed model estimated the odds of response to LAI treatment at month 3 from the optimal baseline BARS cutpoint. RESULTS: The ROC analysis determined that the single baseline BARS rating (cutoff ≤66%), indicating low adherence, best discriminated patients likely to respond to LAI treatment (AUC = 0.603, SE = 0.046, 95% binomial exact CI = 0.527 to 0.676, p = 0.025), with 38% sensitivity and 85% specificity. The logistic mixed model analysis revealed that patients with ≤66% BARS adherence had 3.464 times the predicted odds (95% CI = 1.604 to 7.480, p = 0.001) of responding to LAI treatment than those who were >66% BARS adherent. CONCLUSION: A single baseline BARS assessment discriminated response to LAI treatment suggesting it is a reasonable tool to identify candidates for LAI antipsychotic treatment.

2.
Lancet ; 395(10228): 986-997, 2020 03 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32199486

RESUMO

Fewer than half of new drugs have data on their comparative benefits and harms against existing treatment options at the time of regulatory approval in Europe and the USA. Even when active-comparator trials exist, they might not produce meaningful data to inform decisions in clinical practice and health policy. The uncertainty associated with the paucity of well designed active-comparator trials has been compounded by legal and regulatory changes in Europe and the USA that have created a complex mix of expedited programmes aimed at facilitating faster access to new drugs. Comparative evidence generation is even sparser for medical devices. Some have argued that the current process for regulatory approval needs to generate more evidence that is useful for patients, clinicians, and payers in health-care systems. We propose a set of five key principles relevant to the European Medicines Agency, European medical device regulatory agencies, US Food and Drug Administration, as well as payers, that we believe will provide the necessary incentives for pharmaceutical and device companies to generate comparative data on drugs and devices and assure timely availability of evidence that is useful for decision making. First, labelling should routinely inform patients and clinicians whether comparative data exist on new products. Second, regulators should be more selective in their use of programmes that facilitate drug and device approvals on the basis of incomplete benefit and harm data. Third, regulators should encourage the conduct of randomised trials with active comparators. Fourth, regulators should use prospectively designed network meta-analyses based on existing and future randomised trials. Last, payers should use their policy levers and negotiating power to incentivise the generation of comparative evidence on new and existing drugs and devices, for example, by explicitly considering proven added benefit in pricing and payment decisions.


Assuntos
Aprovação de Equipamentos/normas , Aprovação de Drogas/métodos , Segurança de Equipamentos , Segurança , Biomarcadores Farmacológicos/análise , Tolerância a Medicamentos , Medicina Baseada em Evidências , Humanos , Estados Unidos , United States Food and Drug Administration
5.
Schizophr Res ; 208: 182-189, 2019 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30930034

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Cognitive impairment in schizophrenia is a core feature of the disorder. Computerized cognitive training has shown promise in pilot studies. A 26-week randomized blinded placebo-controlled trial was conducted to investigate the effect of a novel computerized cognitive training program on cognitive and functional capacity outcomes. METHOD: The study followed MATRICS guidelines for the evaluation of interventions designed to improve cognitive function in schizophrenia. Participants (N = 150) were randomized to experimental (computerized cognitive training in a game-like format) or active control (computer games) groups. Training was conducted in-clinic, with an intended training schedule of 5 days per week, 1 h per day, for 26 weeks. Co-primary outcome measures were the MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery (MCCB) composite score and the UCSD Performance-Based Skills Assessment (UPSA-2) total score, secondary outcome measures included the Cognitive Assessment Interview (CAI) and the Short-Form-12 Mental Composite Score (SF-12 MCS). Target engagement was assessed with task-learning based assessment. RESULTS: At baseline, the groups were well matched. No significant effect of the experimental treatment was seen on the primary or secondary outcome measures compared to the active control. Review of the task learning/target engagement data suggested inadequate target engagement. CONCLUSIONS: Results do not support a cognitive or functional capacity benefit from this implementation of a computerized cognitive training program in people with schizophrenia. In future trials, careful consideration is merited of the assessment of task learning/target engagement, the effects of making the cognitive training game-like on motivation, and the implicit effects of trial requirements on participant selection.

6.
JAMA Psychiatry ; 76(5): 508-515, 2019 May 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30785609

RESUMO

Importance: People with schizophrenia are commonly treated with psychotropic medications in addition to antipsychotics, but there is little evidence about the comparative effectiveness of these adjunctive treatment strategies. Objective: To study the comparative real-world effectiveness of adjunctive psychotropic treatments for patients with schizophrenia. Design, Setting, and Participants: This comparative effectiveness study used US national Medicaid data from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2010, to examine the outcomes of initiating treatment with an antidepressant, a benzodiazepine, a mood stabilizer, or another antipsychotic among adult outpatients (aged 18-64 years) diagnosed with schizophrenia who were stably treated with a single antipsychotic. Data analysis was performed from January 1, 2017, to June 30, 2018. Multinomial logistic regression models were used to estimate propensity scores to balance covariates across the 4 medication groups. Weighted Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to compare treatment outcomes during 365 days on an intention-to-treat basis. Main Outcomes and Measures: Risk of hospitalization for a mental disorder (primary), emergency department (ED) visits for a mental disorder, and all-cause mortality. Results: The study cohort included 81 921 adult outpatients diagnosed with schizophrenia (mean [SD] age, 40.7 [12.4] years; 37 515 women [45.8%]) who were stably treated with a single antipsychotic and then initiated use of an antidepressant (n = 31 117), a benzodiazepine (n = 11 941), a mood stabilizer (n = 12 849), or another antipsychotic (n = 26 014) (reference treatment). Compared with initiating use of another antipsychotic, initiating use of an antidepressant was associated with a lower risk (hazard ratio [HR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.80-0.88) of psychiatric hospitalization, whereas initiating use of a benzodiazepine was associated with a higher risk (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.02-1.15); the risk associated with initiating use of a mood stabilizer (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.94-1.03) was not significantly different from initiating use of another antipsychotic. A similar pattern of associations was observed in psychiatric ED visits for initiating use of an antidepressant (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.88-0.96), a benzodiazepine (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.07-1.19), and a mood stabilizer (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.94-1.04). Initiating use of a mood stabilizer was associated with an increased risk of mortality (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.04-1.66). Conclusions and Relevance: In the treatment of schizophrenia, initiating adjunctive treatment with an antidepressant was associated with reduced risk of psychiatric hospitalization and ED visits compared with initiating use of alternative psychotropic medications. Associations of benzodiazepines and mood stabilizers with poorer outcomes warrant clinical caution and further investigation.

7.
J Clin Psychiatry ; 80(1)2018 11 27.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30549494

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To investigate subgroup responses to long-acting injectable (LAI) medications haloperidol decanoate (HD) and paliperidone palmitate (PP) in a randomized controlled trial that found no difference between the treatments on the primary outcome of efficacy failure. METHODS: A Comparison of Long-Acting Injectable Medications for Schizophrenia (ACLAIMS) enrolled 311 participants from March 2011 to July 2013 meeting DSM-IV-TR criteria for diagnoses of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder at risk of relapse due to medication nonadherence or substance abuse. Participants were randomly assigned to double-blinded treatment with HD or PP and followed for up to 2 years. A committee blinded to treatment assignment adjudicated efficacy failure on the basis of participants' meeting at least 1 of these criteria: psychiatric hospitalization, crisis stabilization, increased outpatient visits, could not discontinue oral antipsychotic, discontinued assigned LAI due to inadequate therapeutic benefit, or ongoing or repeated need for adjunctive oral antipsychotic medication. Survival analyses examined modification of treatment effects on efficacy failure by age, sex, race, substance abuse, baseline symptom severity, and baseline adherence. Mixed-effect linear models and analysis of covariance examined this modification on safety outcomes. RESULTS: An interaction between age and treatment (P = .009) revealed younger participants assigned HD had longer time to efficacy failure than those assigned PP. Interactions were not significant between treatment group and sex, race, substance use disorder, baseline symptom severity, or baseline adherence. An interaction of treatment and age on akathisia (P = .047) found an advantage for PP that was larger among younger persons. An advantage for HD on serum prolactin levels was larger among younger women (P = .033). CONCLUSIONS: Among younger persons, HD was associated with lower rates of efficacy failure than PP. Age effects on adverse effects were mixed. Age-related heterogeneity of antipsychotic treatment effects warrants further investigation and consideration in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01136772.


Assuntos
Transtornos Psicóticos Afetivos/tratamento farmacológico , Antipsicóticos/administração & dosagem , Haloperidol/análogos & derivados , Palmitato de Paliperidona/administração & dosagem , Esquizofrenia/tratamento farmacológico , Adolescente , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Antipsicóticos/efeitos adversos , Preparações de Ação Retardada/administração & dosagem , Preparações de Ação Retardada/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Haloperidol/administração & dosagem , Haloperidol/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Injeções Intramusculares , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Adesão à Medicação , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Palmitato de Paliperidona/efeitos adversos , Intervalo Livre de Progressão , Falha de Tratamento , Adulto Jovem
8.
World Psychiatry ; 17(3): 341-356, 2018 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30192094

RESUMO

The benefits of antipsychotic medications are sometimes obscured by their adverse effects. These effects range from relatively minor tolerability issues (e.g., mild sedation or dry mouth) to very unpleasant (e.g., constipation, akathisia, sexual dysfunction) to painful (e.g., acute dystonias) to disfiguring (e.g., weight gain, tardive dyskinesia) to life-threatening (e.g., myocarditis, agranulocytosis). Importantly, adverse effect profiles are specific to each antipsychotic medication and do not neatly fit into first- and second-generation classifications. This paper reviews management strategies for the most frequent side effects and identifies common principles intended to optimize net antipsychotic benefits. Only use antipsychotics if the indication is clear; only continue antipsychotics if a benefit is discernible. If an antipsychotic is providing substantial benefit, and the adverse effect is not life-threatening, then the first management choice is to lower the dose or adjust the dosing schedule. The next option is to change the antipsychotic; this is often reasonable unless the risk of relapse is high. In some instances, behavioral interventions can be tried. Finally, concomitant medications, though generally not desirable, are necessary in many instances and can provide considerable relief. Among concomitant medication strategies, anticholinergic medications for dystonias and parkinsonism are often effective; beta-blockers and anticholinergic medications are useful for akathisia; and metformin may lead to slight to moderate weight loss. Anticholinergic drops applied sublingually reduce sialorrhea. Usual medications are effective for constipation or dyslipidemias. The clinical utility of recently approved treatments for tardive dyskinesia, valbenazine and deutetrabenazine, is unclear.

9.
Psychiatr Serv ; 69(5): 605-608, 2018 05 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29606075

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: The authors examined the use of different classes of psychotropic medication in outpatient treatment of schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder. METHODS: Data from the United States Medicaid program were used to examine psychotropic medication use in a cohort of patients who had a diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder in the calendar year 2010. RESULTS: The cohort of Medicaid recipients who filled one or more prescriptions for a psychotropic medication in 2010 included 116,249 patients classified as having schizophrenia and 84,537 classified as having schizoaffective disorder. During 2010, 86.1% of patients with schizoaffective disorder and 70.1% with schizophrenia were treated with two or more different classes of psychotropic. CONCLUSIONS: Psychotropic medications other than antipsychotics were commonly prescribed for individuals with a diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. Their widespread use and uncertainty about their net benefits signal a need for research on their efficacy, safety, and appropriate use in these conditions.


Assuntos
Prescrições de Medicamentos/estatística & dados numéricos , Uso de Medicamentos/estatística & dados numéricos , Medicaid/estatística & dados numéricos , Transtornos Psicóticos/tratamento farmacológico , Psicotrópicos/uso terapêutico , Esquizofrenia/tratamento farmacológico , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos
10.
J Clin Psychiatry ; 79(2)2018.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28686818

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the role of antipsychotic medications in the community treatment of adult depression. METHODS: We identified adults (aged 18-64 years) with new episodes of depression treatment (ICD-9-CM 296.2, 296.3, 300.4, or 311) in US national Medicaid data (2001-2010). Patients with alternative ICD-9-CM antipsychotic indications, such as schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, were excluded. Each patient was followed for at least 1 year to characterize antipsychotic and antidepressant treatment and emerging alternative antipsychotic indications. For patients without alternative indications through day 45 following start of antipsychotic treatment, antipsychotics were considered to be intended for treatment of depression. Among this group, we determined whether antipsychotic initiation was preceded by minimally adequate treatment with antidepressants, defined as active antidepressant treatment for ≥ 31 days prior to and including the day of antipsychotic initiation. RESULTS: Within 1 year following onset, 14.0% of patients started an antipsychotic medication. A total of 41.3% of antipsychotic initiators developed an antipsychotic indication other than depression through day 45 following antipsychotic initiation, most often bipolar disorder or depression with psychotic features. The remaining 58.7% of antipsychotic initiators presumably started antipsychotics for nonpsychotic depression. Of these, 71.3% did not have minimally adequate antidepressant treatment prior to starting the antipsychotic medication. CONCLUSION: Antipsychotic medications are used in approximately 1 in 7 patients with a new episode of depression. For 1 in 12 patients, the antipsychotic was considered to be intended for nonpsychotic depression. Almost three-quarters of these patients did not receive minimally adequate treatment with antidepressants prior to antipsychotic initiation. This pattern suggests potentially inappropriate and premature initiation of a drug class with substantial adverse effects and medical risks.


Assuntos
Antidepressivos/uso terapêutico , Antipsicóticos/uso terapêutico , Transtorno Depressivo/tratamento farmacológico , Prescrições de Medicamentos/estatística & dados numéricos , /estatística & dados numéricos , Adolescente , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Adulto Jovem
12.
Curr Behav Neurosci Rep ; 3(2): 165-175, 2016 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27766192

RESUMO

Schizophrenia is characterized by extensive neurocognitive deficits, which are linked to greater disability, poorer functional outcome, and have been suggested to impact daily functioning more than clinical symptoms. Aerobic exercise (AE) has emerged as a potential intervention. This review examines the impact of AE on brain structure and function along with neurocognitive performance in individuals with schizophrenia. Preliminary evidence indicates that AE can increase hippocampal volume and cortical thickness, in addition to exerting a neuroprotective effect against hippocampal volume decrease and cortical thinning. There is also evidence that AE is able to significantly increase serum brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) levels, which are implicated in neurogenesis, neuroplasticity, and cognitive improvement. Finally, evidence suggests that AE plays a significant role in improving overall cognition, including improvements in processing speed, working memory, and visual learning. The authors discuss the implications of the findings and provide recommendations for future research and areas of inquiry.

13.
Psychiatr Serv ; 67(10): 1124-1130, 2016 10 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27247177

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the relative cost-effectiveness of haloperidol decanoate (HD), a first-generation long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotic, and paliperidone palmitate (PP), a second-generation LAI antipsychotic. METHODS: A double-blind, randomized 18-month clinical trial conducted at 22 clinical research sites in the United States compared the cost-effectiveness of HD and PP among 311 adults with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who had been clinically assessed as likely to benefit from an LAI antipsychotic. Patients were randomly assigned to monthly intramuscular injections of HD (25-200 mg) or PP (39-234 mg) for up to 24 months. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were measured by a schizophrenia-specific algorithm based on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale and side-effect assessments; total health care costs were assessed from the perspective of the health system. RESULTS: Mixed-model analysis showed that PP was associated with .0297 greater QALYs over 18 months (p=.03) and with $2,100 more in average costs per quarter for inpatient and outpatient services and medication compared with HD (p<.001). Bootstrap analysis with 5,000 replications showed an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for PP of $508,241 per QALY (95% confidence interval=$122,390-$1,582,711). Net health benefits analysis showed a .98 probability of greater cost-effectiveness for HD compared with PP at an estimated value of $150,000 per QALY and a .50 probability of greater cost-effectiveness at $500,000 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: HD was more cost-effective than PP, suggesting that PP's slightly greater benefits did not justify its markedly higher costs, which are likely to fall once the medication's patent expires.


Assuntos
Antipsicóticos/farmacologia , Análise Custo-Benefício , Haloperidol/análogos & derivados , Palmitato de Paliperidona/farmacologia , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Transtornos Psicóticos/tratamento farmacológico , Esquizofrenia/tratamento farmacológico , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Antipsicóticos/administração & dosagem , Antipsicóticos/economia , Preparações de Ação Retardada , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Haloperidol/administração & dosagem , Haloperidol/economia , Haloperidol/farmacologia , Humanos , Injeções , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Palmitato de Paliperidona/administração & dosagem , Palmitato de Paliperidona/economia , Transtornos Psicóticos/economia , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida , Esquizofrenia/economia , Estados Unidos , Adulto Jovem
14.
Psychiatr Serv ; 67(4): 369-71, 2016 Apr 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26725299

RESUMO

Clozapine remains the only medication approved for treatment-resistant schizophrenia. But underuse is the norm. In 2010, the New York State Office of Mental Health began a multifaceted initiative to promote the evidence-based use of clozapine. From 2009 to 2013, in the absence of a well-funded pharmaceutical marketing campaign, the proportion of new clozapine trials among all new outpatient antipsychotic trials increased 40% among adult New York Medicaid recipients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia. The largest gains occurred in state-operated clinics. New York's experience demonstrates the feasibility of making clozapine more accessible to patients who stand to benefit most.


Assuntos
Antipsicóticos/uso terapêutico , Clozapina/uso terapêutico , Prescrições de Medicamentos/normas , Medicaid , Esquizofrenia/tratamento farmacológico , Humanos , New York , Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de Saúde , Estados Unidos
16.
Am J Psychiatry ; 173(2): 166-73, 2016 Feb 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26541815

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: The authors compared the effectiveness of initiating treatment with either clozapine or a standard antipsychotic among adults with evidence of treatment-resistant schizophrenia in routine clinical practice. METHOD: U.S. national Medicaid data from 2001 to 2009 were used to examine treatment outcomes in a cohort of patients with schizophrenia and evidence of treatment resistance that initiated clozapine (N=3,123) and in a propensity score-matched cohort that initiated a standard antipsychotic (N=3,123). Interventions were new initiation of clozapine or a standard antipsychotic medication, defined as no exposure to the new medication in the prior 365 days. The primary outcome was hospital admission for a mental disorder. Secondary outcomes included discontinuation of the index antipsychotic, use of an additional antipsychotic, incidence of serious medical conditions, and mortality. RESULTS: Initiation of clozapine was associated with a significantly decreased rate of psychiatric hospital admission (hazard ratio=0.78, 95% CI=0.69-0.88), index antipsychotic discontinuation (hazard ratio=0.60, 95% CI=0.55-0.65), and use of an additional antipsychotic (hazard ratio=0.76, 95% CI=0.70-0.82). Clozapine was associated with significantly increased incidence of diabetes mellitus (2.8% for clozapine vs. 1.4% for standard antipsychotic; hazard ratio=1.63, 95% CI=0.98-2.70), hyperlipidemia (12.9% for clozapine vs. 8.5% for standard antipsychotic; hazard ratio=1.40, 95%CI=1.09-1.78), and intestinal obstruction (0.9% for clozapine vs. 0.3% for standard antipsychotic; hazard ratio=2.50, 95% CI=0.97-6.44). CONCLUSIONS: In adults with schizophrenia and evidence of treatment resistance, initiating clozapine compared with initiating a standard antipsychotic was associated with greater effectiveness on several important outcomes. Increasing the judicious use of clozapine is warranted together with vigilance to prevent and detect serious medical adverse effects.


Assuntos
Antipsicóticos/uso terapêutico , Clozapina/uso terapêutico , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Serviços de Saúde Mental/estatística & dados numéricos , Transtornos Psicóticos/tratamento farmacológico , Esquizofrenia/tratamento farmacológico , Adulto , Estudos de Coortes , Bases de Dados Factuais , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Hiperlipidemias/epidemiologia , Obstrução Intestinal/epidemiologia , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Medicaid , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Modelos de Riscos Proporcionais , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento , Estados Unidos
17.
JAMA Psychiatry ; 72(12): 1172-81, 2015 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26509694

RESUMO

IMPORTANCE: Although adults with schizophrenia have a significantly increased risk of premature mortality, sample size limitations of previous research have hindered the identification of the underlying causes. OBJECTIVE: To describe overall and cause-specific mortality rates and standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) for adults with schizophrenia compared with the US general population. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We identified a national retrospective longitudinal cohort of patients with schizophrenia 20 to 64 years old in the Medicaid program (January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2007). The cohort included 1,138,853 individuals, 4,807,121 years of follow-up, and 74,003 deaths, of which 65,553 had a known cause. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Mortality ratios for the schizophrenia cohort standardized to the general population with respect to age, sex, race/ethnicity, and geographic region were estimated for all-cause and cause-specific mortality. Mortality rates per 100,000 person-years and the mean years of potential life lost per death were also determined. Death record information was obtained from the National Death Index. RESULTS: Adults with schizophrenia were more than 3.5 times (all-cause SMR, 3.7; 95% CI, 3.7-3.7) as likely to die in the follow-up period as were adults in the general population. Cardiovascular disease had the highest mortality rate (403.2 per 100,000 person-years) and an SMR of 3.6 (95% CI, 3.5-3.6). Among 6 selected cancers, lung cancer had the highest mortality rate (74.8 per 100,000 person-years) and an SMR of 2.4 (95% CI, 2.4-2.5). Particularly elevated SMRs were observed for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (9.9; 95% CI, 9.6-10.2) and influenza and pneumonia (7.0; 95% CI, 6.7-7.4). Accidental deaths (119.7 per 100,000 person-years) accounted for more than twice as many deaths as suicide (52.0 per 100,000 person-years). Nonsuicidal substance-induced death, mostly from alcohol or other drugs, was also a leading cause of death (95.2 per 100,000 person-years). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In a US national cohort of adults with schizophrenia, excess deaths from cardiovascular and respiratory diseases implicate modifiable cardiovascular risk factors, including especially tobacco use. Excess deaths directly attributable to alcohol or other drugs highlight threats posed by substance abuse. More aggressive identification and management of cardiovascular risk factors, as well as reducing tobacco use and substance abuse, should be leading priorities in the medical care of adults with schizophrenia.


Assuntos
Mortalidade Prematura , Esquizofrenia/mortalidade , Adulto , Causas de Morte , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Adulto Jovem
20.
Psychiatr Serv ; 66(2): 193-6, 2015 Feb 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25642614

RESUMO

This Open Forum describes research methods to ensure high-quality health services research using electronic health records (EHRs) as a data source. The authors describe unique characteristics of EHRs that could introduce data inaccuracies into research, and they outline a framework for methods to evaluate the validity of EHR-derived data, including the development of data extraction rules and ways to validate those rules. The authors argue that the use of such methods will help ensure the validity of research using EHRs as a data source.


Assuntos
Registros Eletrônicos de Saúde , Pesquisa sobre Serviços de Saúde/métodos , Saúde Mental , Humanos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA