To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Clozapine is the most effective medication for treatment refractory schizophrenia. However, descriptions of the mental health and comorbidity profile and care experiences of people on clozapine in routine clinical settings are scarce. Using data from the 2010 Australian Survey of High Impact Psychosis, we aimed to examine the proportion of people using clozapine, and to compare clozapine users with other antipsychotic users on demographic, mental health, adverse drug reaction, polypharmacy and treatment satisfaction variables.
Data describing 1049 people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, who reported taking any antipsychotic medication in the previous 4 weeks, were drawn from a representative Australian survey of people with psychotic disorders in contact with mental health services in the previous 12 months. We compared participants taking clozapine (n = 257, 22.4%) with those taking other antipsychotic medications, on a range of demographic, clinical and treatment-related indicators.
One quarter of participants were on clozapine. Of participants with a chronic course of illness, only one third were on clozapine. After adjusting for diagnosis and illness chronicity, participants taking clozapine had significantly lower odds of current alcohol, cannabis and other drug use despite similar lifetime odds. Metabolic syndrome and diabetes were more common among people taking clozapine; chronic pain was less common. Psychotropic polypharmacy did not differ between groups.
Consistent with international evidence of clozapine underutilisation, a large number of participants with chronic illness and high symptom burden were not taking clozapine. The lower probabilities of current substance use and chronic pain among clozapine users warrant further study.
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is increasingly being applied to psychiatric conditions such as obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD), major depression and anorexia nervosa. Double-blind, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of active versus sham treatment have been limited to small numbers. We therefore undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of DBS in psychiatric conditions to maximize study power.
We conducted a systematic literature search for double-blind, RCTs of active versus sham treatment using Pubmed/Medline and EMBASE up to April 2013. Where possible, we combined results from studies in a meta-analysis. We assessed differences in final values between the active and sham treatments for parallel-group studies and compared changes from baseline score for cross-over designs.
Inclusion criteria were met by five studies, all of which were of OCD. Forty-four subjects provided data for the meta-analysis. The main outcome was a reduction in obsessive symptoms as measured by the Yale–Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (YBOCS). Patients on active, as opposed to sham, treatment had a significantly lower mean score [mean difference (MD) −8.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) −13.35 to −5.76, p < 0.001], representing partial remission. However, one-third of patients experienced significant adverse effects (n = 16). There were no differences between the two groups in terms of other outcomes.
DBS may show promise for treatment-resistant OCD but there are insufficient randomized controlled data for other psychiatric conditions. DBS remains an experimental treatment in adults for severe, medically refractory conditions until further data are available.
Personalised support services assist patients with severe and persistent mental illness (SPMI) to live with functional deficits by providing living skills, emotional support, community access and advocacy. This paper aims to systematically review the evidence for personalised support.
Systematic searches of Medline, PsycINFO and Google Scholar (inception to March 2011) identified studies investigating patient outcomes for personalised support services. The quality of the selected studies was assessed. The strength of evidence for the three categories of patient outcomes (illness acuity, personal functioning and patient satisfaction) was graded.
Fifteen studies met inclusion criteria with most rated as having moderate or weak study designs. The selected studies evaluated programs for outpatients with SPMI. There was moderate strength of evidence for reducing illness acuity and improving patient satisfaction with services, and weak strength of evidence for improving personal functioning in studies published to date. Most programs delivered multiple service types, and no clear pattern of service types leading to specific patient outcomes could be discerned.
Although evidence published to date for personalised support is of variable quality, it suggests that services may be effective. More research on the effects of personalised support subtypes on patient outcomes is required.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.