Antipsychotic polypharmacy

A survey study of prescriber attitudes, knowledge and behavior

Christoph U. Correll, Ladan Shaikh, Juan A. Gallego, Jeffrey Nachbar, Vladimir Olshanskiy, Taishiro Kishimoto, John M. Kane

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

49 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: Although common in psychiatric practice, reasons for antipsychotic polypharmacy (APP) have remained unclear. Methods: Single-site, semi-structured interview study of prescribers at a psychiatric teaching hospital inquiring about APP attitudes and behaviors, including frequency, preferred combinations, rationale and concerns. Results: Forty-four prescribers reported using APP in 17.0±10.0% of antipsychotic-treated patients. Although clinicians themselves initiated APP in only 23.3±27.0% of cases, they did not attempt conversion to antipsychotic monotherapy in 40.9±37.7%, despite reported successful conversion in 28.0±30.8% of cases. The following reasons justified most APP (0-10): cross-titration (9.2±1.4), failed clozapine trial (8.2±2.2), randomized controlled evidence (8.0±2.0), and clozapine intolerance (7.7±2.6). Prescribers felt "moderately" (5.0±1.9) concerned about APP (0-10), mostly due to chronic side effects (7.6±2.0), lack of evidence (7.1±2.2), non-adherence risk (6.7±2.3) and mortality risk (6.7±3.2), while increased cost (4.9±2.5) and higher total antipsychotic dose (4.2±2.9) ranked lowest. Comparing high with low APP prescribers (>10% vs ≤10% of patients; mean: 36.1±19.8 vs. 3.4±3.4, p<0.0001), no differences emerged on 25/26 ratings regarding APP justification and 9/9 ratings regarding concerns. In a multivariate analyses, only attending status (OR=10.3, p=0.0043) and endorsing a specific APP preference (OR=21.4, p=0.011) predicted APP use >10% (r 2:0.35, p<0.0001), yet no uniformly preferred APP strategy emerged. Conclusions: High APP prescribers had more clinical experience, less concerns about APP and more likely a preferred APP choice, although no overall preferred strategy emerged. Otherwise, high and low APP prescribers shared attitudes toward APP. Both had inherited most of their APP cases and were reluctant to convert patients to antipsychotic monotherapy.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)58-62
Number of pages5
JournalSchizophrenia Research
Volume131
Issue number1-3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2011 Sep
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Polypharmacy
Antipsychotic Agents
Surveys and Questionnaires
Clozapine

Keywords

  • Antipsychotics
  • Attitudes
  • Polypharmacy
  • Prescriber
  • Reasons
  • Schizophrenia

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Biological Psychiatry

Cite this

Correll, C. U., Shaikh, L., Gallego, J. A., Nachbar, J., Olshanskiy, V., Kishimoto, T., & Kane, J. M. (2011). Antipsychotic polypharmacy: A survey study of prescriber attitudes, knowledge and behavior. Schizophrenia Research, 131(1-3), 58-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2011.02.016

Antipsychotic polypharmacy : A survey study of prescriber attitudes, knowledge and behavior. / Correll, Christoph U.; Shaikh, Ladan; Gallego, Juan A.; Nachbar, Jeffrey; Olshanskiy, Vladimir; Kishimoto, Taishiro; Kane, John M.

In: Schizophrenia Research, Vol. 131, No. 1-3, 09.2011, p. 58-62.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Correll, CU, Shaikh, L, Gallego, JA, Nachbar, J, Olshanskiy, V, Kishimoto, T & Kane, JM 2011, 'Antipsychotic polypharmacy: A survey study of prescriber attitudes, knowledge and behavior', Schizophrenia Research, vol. 131, no. 1-3, pp. 58-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2011.02.016
Correll, Christoph U. ; Shaikh, Ladan ; Gallego, Juan A. ; Nachbar, Jeffrey ; Olshanskiy, Vladimir ; Kishimoto, Taishiro ; Kane, John M. / Antipsychotic polypharmacy : A survey study of prescriber attitudes, knowledge and behavior. In: Schizophrenia Research. 2011 ; Vol. 131, No. 1-3. pp. 58-62.
@article{954223520b624b65951bdcc5e788e823,
title = "Antipsychotic polypharmacy: A survey study of prescriber attitudes, knowledge and behavior",
abstract = "Objective: Although common in psychiatric practice, reasons for antipsychotic polypharmacy (APP) have remained unclear. Methods: Single-site, semi-structured interview study of prescribers at a psychiatric teaching hospital inquiring about APP attitudes and behaviors, including frequency, preferred combinations, rationale and concerns. Results: Forty-four prescribers reported using APP in 17.0±10.0{\%} of antipsychotic-treated patients. Although clinicians themselves initiated APP in only 23.3±27.0{\%} of cases, they did not attempt conversion to antipsychotic monotherapy in 40.9±37.7{\%}, despite reported successful conversion in 28.0±30.8{\%} of cases. The following reasons justified most APP (0-10): cross-titration (9.2±1.4), failed clozapine trial (8.2±2.2), randomized controlled evidence (8.0±2.0), and clozapine intolerance (7.7±2.6). Prescribers felt {"}moderately{"} (5.0±1.9) concerned about APP (0-10), mostly due to chronic side effects (7.6±2.0), lack of evidence (7.1±2.2), non-adherence risk (6.7±2.3) and mortality risk (6.7±3.2), while increased cost (4.9±2.5) and higher total antipsychotic dose (4.2±2.9) ranked lowest. Comparing high with low APP prescribers (>10{\%} vs ≤10{\%} of patients; mean: 36.1±19.8 vs. 3.4±3.4, p<0.0001), no differences emerged on 25/26 ratings regarding APP justification and 9/9 ratings regarding concerns. In a multivariate analyses, only attending status (OR=10.3, p=0.0043) and endorsing a specific APP preference (OR=21.4, p=0.011) predicted APP use >10{\%} (r 2:0.35, p<0.0001), yet no uniformly preferred APP strategy emerged. Conclusions: High APP prescribers had more clinical experience, less concerns about APP and more likely a preferred APP choice, although no overall preferred strategy emerged. Otherwise, high and low APP prescribers shared attitudes toward APP. Both had inherited most of their APP cases and were reluctant to convert patients to antipsychotic monotherapy.",
keywords = "Antipsychotics, Attitudes, Polypharmacy, Prescriber, Reasons, Schizophrenia",
author = "Correll, {Christoph U.} and Ladan Shaikh and Gallego, {Juan A.} and Jeffrey Nachbar and Vladimir Olshanskiy and Taishiro Kishimoto and Kane, {John M.}",
year = "2011",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1016/j.schres.2011.02.016",
language = "English",
volume = "131",
pages = "58--62",
journal = "Schizophrenia Research",
issn = "0920-9964",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "1-3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Antipsychotic polypharmacy

T2 - A survey study of prescriber attitudes, knowledge and behavior

AU - Correll, Christoph U.

AU - Shaikh, Ladan

AU - Gallego, Juan A.

AU - Nachbar, Jeffrey

AU - Olshanskiy, Vladimir

AU - Kishimoto, Taishiro

AU - Kane, John M.

PY - 2011/9

Y1 - 2011/9

N2 - Objective: Although common in psychiatric practice, reasons for antipsychotic polypharmacy (APP) have remained unclear. Methods: Single-site, semi-structured interview study of prescribers at a psychiatric teaching hospital inquiring about APP attitudes and behaviors, including frequency, preferred combinations, rationale and concerns. Results: Forty-four prescribers reported using APP in 17.0±10.0% of antipsychotic-treated patients. Although clinicians themselves initiated APP in only 23.3±27.0% of cases, they did not attempt conversion to antipsychotic monotherapy in 40.9±37.7%, despite reported successful conversion in 28.0±30.8% of cases. The following reasons justified most APP (0-10): cross-titration (9.2±1.4), failed clozapine trial (8.2±2.2), randomized controlled evidence (8.0±2.0), and clozapine intolerance (7.7±2.6). Prescribers felt "moderately" (5.0±1.9) concerned about APP (0-10), mostly due to chronic side effects (7.6±2.0), lack of evidence (7.1±2.2), non-adherence risk (6.7±2.3) and mortality risk (6.7±3.2), while increased cost (4.9±2.5) and higher total antipsychotic dose (4.2±2.9) ranked lowest. Comparing high with low APP prescribers (>10% vs ≤10% of patients; mean: 36.1±19.8 vs. 3.4±3.4, p<0.0001), no differences emerged on 25/26 ratings regarding APP justification and 9/9 ratings regarding concerns. In a multivariate analyses, only attending status (OR=10.3, p=0.0043) and endorsing a specific APP preference (OR=21.4, p=0.011) predicted APP use >10% (r 2:0.35, p<0.0001), yet no uniformly preferred APP strategy emerged. Conclusions: High APP prescribers had more clinical experience, less concerns about APP and more likely a preferred APP choice, although no overall preferred strategy emerged. Otherwise, high and low APP prescribers shared attitudes toward APP. Both had inherited most of their APP cases and were reluctant to convert patients to antipsychotic monotherapy.

AB - Objective: Although common in psychiatric practice, reasons for antipsychotic polypharmacy (APP) have remained unclear. Methods: Single-site, semi-structured interview study of prescribers at a psychiatric teaching hospital inquiring about APP attitudes and behaviors, including frequency, preferred combinations, rationale and concerns. Results: Forty-four prescribers reported using APP in 17.0±10.0% of antipsychotic-treated patients. Although clinicians themselves initiated APP in only 23.3±27.0% of cases, they did not attempt conversion to antipsychotic monotherapy in 40.9±37.7%, despite reported successful conversion in 28.0±30.8% of cases. The following reasons justified most APP (0-10): cross-titration (9.2±1.4), failed clozapine trial (8.2±2.2), randomized controlled evidence (8.0±2.0), and clozapine intolerance (7.7±2.6). Prescribers felt "moderately" (5.0±1.9) concerned about APP (0-10), mostly due to chronic side effects (7.6±2.0), lack of evidence (7.1±2.2), non-adherence risk (6.7±2.3) and mortality risk (6.7±3.2), while increased cost (4.9±2.5) and higher total antipsychotic dose (4.2±2.9) ranked lowest. Comparing high with low APP prescribers (>10% vs ≤10% of patients; mean: 36.1±19.8 vs. 3.4±3.4, p<0.0001), no differences emerged on 25/26 ratings regarding APP justification and 9/9 ratings regarding concerns. In a multivariate analyses, only attending status (OR=10.3, p=0.0043) and endorsing a specific APP preference (OR=21.4, p=0.011) predicted APP use >10% (r 2:0.35, p<0.0001), yet no uniformly preferred APP strategy emerged. Conclusions: High APP prescribers had more clinical experience, less concerns about APP and more likely a preferred APP choice, although no overall preferred strategy emerged. Otherwise, high and low APP prescribers shared attitudes toward APP. Both had inherited most of their APP cases and were reluctant to convert patients to antipsychotic monotherapy.

KW - Antipsychotics

KW - Attitudes

KW - Polypharmacy

KW - Prescriber

KW - Reasons

KW - Schizophrenia

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80051796537&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80051796537&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.schres.2011.02.016

DO - 10.1016/j.schres.2011.02.016

M3 - Article

VL - 131

SP - 58

EP - 62

JO - Schizophrenia Research

JF - Schizophrenia Research

SN - 0920-9964

IS - 1-3

ER -