Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 62
Filter
1.
BMC Psychiatry ; 22(1): 376, 2022 06 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1875003

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Individuals with schizophrenia are a vulnerable and under-served population who are also at risk for severe morbidity and mortality following COVID-19 infection. Our research was designed to identify factors that put individuals with schizophrenia at increased risk of COVID-19 infection. METHODS: This study was a retrospective cohort analysis of medical and pharmacy claims among 493,796 individuals residing in the United States with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, between January 1, 2019 and June 30, 2020. A confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 infection by September 30, 2020 was regressed on demographics, social determinants, comorbidity, and pre-pandemic (December 2019 - February 2020) healthcare utilization characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 35,249 (7.1%) individuals were diagnosed with COVID-19. Elevated odds of COVID-19 infection were associated with age, increasing consistently from 40-49 years (OR: 1.16) to 80+ years (OR:5.92), male sex (OR: 1.08), Medicaid (OR: 2.17) or Medicare (OR: 1.23) insurance, African American race (OR: 1.42), Hispanic ethnicity (OR: 1.23), and higher Charlson Comorbidity Index. Select psychiatric comorbidities (depressive disorder, adjustment disorder, bipolar disorder, anxiety, and sleep-wake disorder) were associated with elevated odds of infection, while alcohol use disorder and PTSD were associated with lower odds. A pre-pandemic psychiatry (OR:0.56) or community mental health center (OR:0.55) visit were associated with lower odds as was antipsychotic treatment with long-acting injectable antipsychotic (OR: 0.72) and oral antipsychotic (OR: 0.62). CONCLUSIONS: Among individuals with schizophrenia, risk of COVID-19 infection was substantially higher among those with fewer economic resources, with greater medical and psychiatric comorbidity burden, and those who resided in African American or Hispanic communities. In contrast, individuals actively engaged in psychiatric treatment had substantially lower likelihood of infection. These results provide insights for healthcare providers that can translate into improved identification of at-risk individuals and interventions to reduce the risk and consequences of COVID-19 infection.


Subject(s)
Antipsychotic Agents , COVID-19 , Psychotic Disorders , Schizophrenia , Adult , Aged , Antipsychotic Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Male , Medicare , Middle Aged , Psychotic Disorders/psychology , Retrospective Studies , Schizophrenia/diagnosis , Schizophrenia/epidemiology , United States/epidemiology
3.
5.
BMJ Open ; 12(4): e056420, 2022 04 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1822070

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) is associated with significant impairment of functioning and high treatment costs. Identification of patients at high risk of TRS at the time of their initial diagnosis may significantly improve clinical outcomes and minimise social and functional disability. We aim to develop a prognostic model for predicting the risk of developing TRS in patients with first-episode schizophrenia and to examine its potential utility and acceptability as a clinical decision tool. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will use two well-characterised longitudinal UK-based first-episode psychosis cohorts: Aetiology and Ethnicity in Schizophrenia and Other Psychoses and Genetics and Psychosis for which data have been collected on sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. We will identify candidate predictors for the model based on current literature and stakeholder consultation. Model development will use all data, with the number of candidate predictors restricted according to available sample size and event rate. A model for predicting risk of TRS will be developed based on penalised regression, with missing data handled using multiple imputation. Internal validation will be undertaken via bootstrapping, obtaining optimism-adjusted estimates of the model's performance. The clinical utility of the model in terms of clinically relevant risk thresholds will be evaluated using net benefit and decision curves (comparative to competing strategies). Consultation with patients and clinical stakeholders will determine potential thresholds of risk for treatment decision-making. The acceptability of embedding the model as a clinical tool will be explored using qualitative focus groups with up to 20 clinicians in total from early intervention services. Clinicians will be recruited from services in Stafford and London with the focus groups being held via an online platform. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The development of the prognostic model will be based on anonymised data from existing cohorts, for which ethical approval is in place. Ethical approval has been obtained from Keele University for the qualitative focus groups within early intervention in psychosis services (ref: MH-210174). Suitable processes are in place to obtain informed consent for National Health Service staff taking part in interviews or focus groups. A study information sheet with cover letter and consent form have been prepared and approved by the local Research Ethics Committee. Findings will be shared through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and social media. A lay summary will be published on collaborator websites.


Subject(s)
Antipsychotic Agents , Psychotic Disorders , Schizophrenia , Antipsychotic Agents/therapeutic use , Health Care Costs , Humans , Psychotic Disorders/therapy , Schizophrenia/drug therapy , State Medicine
6.
J Med Case Rep ; 16(1): 171, 2022 Apr 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1799092

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 syndrome typically consists of respiratory symptoms and other general nonspecific symptoms. Psychotic manifestations of coronavirus disease 2019 attributable to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection are seldom reported. We report a case of coronavirus disease 2019 in a young West African male who had no known risk factors of psychiatric illness or past history of psychiatric disease presenting with acute psychosis. CASE PRESENTATION: Our patient, who was a young West African male, presented without the typical respiratory symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 and also without a background history of psychiatric illness or any other significant stressors in his past or present social history. He had acute onset of psychotic symptoms consisting of visual and auditory hallucinations, delusions of persecution, and lack of insight. He was admitted and managed with antipsychotic medication and mood stabilizer. His laboratory workup was normal except for positive coronavirus disease 2019 polymerase chain reaction and his liver enzymes, which showed elevated gamma glutamyl transferase, a finding consistent with coronavirus disease 2019. His head computed tomography scan was also normal. The patient made a gradual recovery from his psychotic symptoms, with gain of insight 7 weeks after onset of symptoms, at which time his coronavirus disease 2019 test came back negative along with other laboratory parameters. He returned to work 12 weeks after his presentation and has been performing well. CONCLUSION: Psychosis can be a primary presenting symptom in patients with coronavirus disease 2019, including those without respiratory symptoms.


Subject(s)
Antipsychotic Agents , COVID-19 , Psychotic Disorders , Antipsychotic Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/complications , Hallucinations/diagnosis , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Psychotic Disorders/diagnosis , Psychotic Disorders/drug therapy , Psychotic Disorders/etiology
7.
Br J Psychiatry ; 221(1): 417-424, 2022 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1731562

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has disproportionately affected people with mental health conditions. AIMS: We investigated the association between receiving psychotropic drugs, as an indicator of mental health conditions, and COVID-19 vaccine uptake. METHOD: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of a prospective cohort of the Northern Ireland adult population using national linked primary care registration, vaccination, secondary care and pharmacy dispensing data. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses investigated the association between anxiolytic, antidepressant, antipsychotic, and hypnotic use and COVID-19 vaccination status, accounting for age, gender, deprivation and comorbidities. Receiving any COVID-19 vaccine was the primary outcome. RESULTS: There were 1 433 814 individuals, of whom 1 166 917 received a COVID-19 vaccination. Psychotropic medications were dispensed to 267 049 people. In univariable analysis, people who received any psychotropic medication had greater odds of receiving COVID-19 vaccination: odds ratio (OR) = 1.42 (95% CI 1.41-1.44). However, after adjustment, psychotropic medication use was associated with reduced odds of vaccination (ORadj = 0.90, 95% CI 0.89-0.91). People who received anxiolytics (ORadj = 0.63, 95% CI 0.61-0.65), antipsychotics (ORadj = 0.75, 95% CI 0.73-0.78) and hypnotics (ORadj = 0.90, 95% CI 0.87-0.93) had reduced odds of being vaccinated. Antidepressant use was not associated with vaccination (ORadj = 1.02, 95% CI 1.00-1.03). CONCLUSIONS: We found significantly lower odds of vaccination in people who were receiving treatment with anxiolytic and antipsychotic medications. There is an urgent need for evidence-based, tailored vaccine support for people with mental health conditions.


Subject(s)
Anti-Anxiety Agents , Antipsychotic Agents , COVID-19 , Adult , Anti-Anxiety Agents/therapeutic use , Antidepressive Agents/therapeutic use , Antipsychotic Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Hypnotics and Sedatives/therapeutic use , Prospective Studies , Psychotropic Drugs/therapeutic use , Vaccination
11.
BMC Psychiatry ; 21(1): 633, 2021 12 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1635337

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had significant impacts on how mental health services are delivered to patients throughout Canada. The reduction of in-person healthcare services have created unique challenges for individuals with psychotic disorders that require regular clinic visits to administer and monitor long-acting injectable antipsychotic medications. METHODS: To better understand how LAI usage was impacted, national and provincial patient-level longitudinal prescribing data from Canadian retail pharmacies were used to examine LAI prescribing practices during the pandemic. Prescribing data on new starts of medication, discontinuations of medications, switches between medications, antipsychotic name, concomitant medications, payer plan, gender and age were collected from January 2019 to December 2020 for individuals ≥18-years of age, and examined by month, as well as by distinct pandemic related epochs characterized by varying degrees of public awareness, incidence of COVID-19 infections and public health restrictions. RESULTS: National, and provincial level data revealed that rates of LAI prescribing including new starts, discontinuations and switches between LAI products remained highly stable (i.e., no statistically significant differences) throughout the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Equal numbers of LAI new starts and discontinuations prior to and during the pandemic suggests prescribing of LAI antipsychotics, for those already in care, continued unchanged throughout the pandemic. The observed consistency of LAI prescribing contrasts with other areas of healthcare, such as cardiovascular and diabetes care, which experienced decreases in medication prescribing during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Antipsychotic Agents , COVID-19 , Schizophrenia , Adolescent , Antipsychotic Agents/therapeutic use , Canada , Delayed-Action Preparations/therapeutic use , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Schizophrenia/drug therapy
12.
J Psychiatr Pract ; 28(1): 62-66, 2022 01 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1603948

ABSTRACT

Clozapine is the antipsychotic of choice in treatment-resistant schizophrenia. Serum clozapine concentration testing is essential to monitor adherence, adjust dosing, and ensure treatment safety. However, patients who are acutely unwell are frequently reluctant to undergo blood testing requiring venipuncture. Also, conventional laboratory-based measurement of clozapine plasma levels can take days, thus contributing to the suboptimal use of clozapine when it is most needed. We pioneered clozapine whole-blood point of care (POC) testing in the acute inpatient setting in the treatment of a group of actively psychotic patients receiving clozapine during the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. POC clozapine testing using automated homogenous immunoassay requires only finger prick blood sampling and is more acceptable to patients. As it produces results in minutes, clozapine POC testing serves to promptly ascertain adherence with treatment and inform therapeutic dosing. POC testing offered a more practical, less invasive, and quicker alternative to conventional methods of monitoring clozapine levels. Near immediate availability of clozapine levels expedited clinical decisions and helped ensure safe clozapine prescribing to our severely psychotic patients in a time of crisis. By facilitating patients' early safe discharge from the hospital, clozapine POC testing also reduced length of hospitalization.


Subject(s)
Antipsychotic Agents , COVID-19 , Clozapine , Psychiatry , Antipsychotic Agents/therapeutic use , Clozapine/adverse effects , Humans , Inpatients , Pandemics , Point-of-Care Testing , SARS-CoV-2
14.
CNS Neurol Disord Drug Targets ; 20(5): 473-477, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526730

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Catatonia is a psychomotor syndrome that presents with severe symptoms which can lead to dangerous and lethal conditions if not diagnosed and treated properly. SARS-- CoV-2 is a positive-sense single-stranded RNA virus that can occur in severe cases with acute pneumonia, ARDS, sepsis and septic shock. In these cases, ICU admission is necessary. CASE SUMMARY: A 59-year-old Caucasian man with septic shock and bilateral interstitial pneumonia from SARS-CoV-2 and schizotypal personality disorder presented with catatonic behaviour manifested by soporous state, response to intense painful stimuli with the opening of the eyes, execution of simple verbal commands, maintenance of the same position, catalepsy, immobility, rigidity and mutism. At the same time, there were symptoms of septic shock and catatonic symptoms, causing greater difficulty in the correct formulation of the diagnosis. During the course of his hospitalization, he was treated with asenapine 20 mg/day. The catatonia responded rapidly and significantly to the asenapine. DISCUSSION: To date, the pathophysiology of catatonia is unclear, and few guidelines are available for the treatment of catatonia. In the literature, studies have reported the efficacy of benzodiazepines such as lorazepam and diazepam, GABAA agonists such as zolpidem, NMDA receptor antagonists such as memantine, antidepressant SSRIs such as fluoxetine and paroxetine, and antipsychotics such as olanzapine, clozapine and aripiprazole. We demonstrate that the antipsychotic asenapine is also effective in treating catatonic symptoms in psychiatric disorders. CONCLUSION: Asenapine produced a rapid and significant reduction in catatonic symptoms in our patient with schizotypal personality disorder.


Subject(s)
Antipsychotic Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/complications , Catatonia/drug therapy , Catatonia/etiology , Depressive Disorder, Major/complications , Dibenzocycloheptenes/therapeutic use , Schizotypal Personality Disorder/complications , Shock, Septic/complications , Shock, Septic/etiology , Catatonia/psychology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pain/etiology , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/complications
16.
J Manag Care Spec Pharm ; 27(10-a Suppl): S2-S13, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1471241

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Despite therapeutic advances for patients with schizophrenia, improving patient outcomes and reducing the cost of care continue to challenge formulary decision makers. OBJECTIVES: To (1) understand the perspectives of formulary decision makers on challenges to optimal schizophrenia population management and (2) identify best practices and recommendations for mitigating these challenges. METHODS: This mixed-methods study, conducted in a double-blind manner, comprised in-depth telephone interviews with formulary decision makers from February through May 2020, and a web-based follow-on survey that was sent to all participants in October 2020. US-based formulary decision makers were recruited if they were directly involved in schizophrenia drug formulary or coverage decision making for national or regional payers, health systems, or behavioral health centers. Formulary decision makers' perceptions of challenges, policies, and programs related to schizophrenia population health management were assessed generally and in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: 19 formulary decision makers participated in the interviews and 18 (95%) completed the survey. Participants reported a spectrum of patient- and payer-driven challenges in schizophrenia population health management, including medication nonadherence, high pharmacy and medical costs, and frequent hospitalizations and emergency department visits. Participants noted that COVID-19 had worsened all identified challenges, although patient unemployment (mean score of 2.00 on a scale of 1 [made much worse] to 5 [made much better]) and reduced access to psychiatric care (mean score, 2.12) were most negatively affected. The most common strategies implemented in order to improve schizophrenia population health management included case management (89%), telemedicine (83%), care coordination programs (72%), strategies to mitigate barriers to accessing medication (61%), and providing nonmedical services to address social determinants of health (56%). Participants noted that, ideally, all treatments for schizophrenia would be available on their formularies without utilization management policies in place in order to increase accessibility to medication, but cost to the health plans made that difficult. Whereas 61% of respondents believed that long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) were currently underused in their organizations, only 28% represented organizations with open access policies for LAIs. Participants believed that among patients with schizophrenia, LAIs were most beneficial for those with a history of poor or uncertain adherence to oral medications (mean score of 4.50 on a scale of 1 [not at all beneficial] to 5 [extremely beneficial]) and those with recurring emergency department visits and inpatient stays (mean score, 3.94). Study participants reported slightly increased use of LAIs (mean score of 3.17 on a scale of 1 [negatively impacted] to 5 [positively impacted]) among their patients with schizophrenia in response to the COVID-19 pandemic; 29% of participants reported easing access restrictions for LAIs. CONCLUSIONS: Participants described persisting challenges and various approaches intended to improve schizophrenia population health management. They also recommended strategies to optimize future health management for this population, including expanding programs to address social determinants of health and mitigating barriers to accessing treatment. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC. Roach, Graf, Pednekar, and Chou are employees of PRECISIONheor, which received financial support from Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, to conduct this study. Chou owns equity in Precision Medicine Group, the parent company of PRECISIONheor. Lin and Benson are employees of Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC. Doshi has served as a consultant, advisory board member, or both, for Acadia, Allergan, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Merck, Otsuka, and Sage Therapeutics and has received research funding from AbbVie, Biogen, Humana, Janssen, Novartis, Merck, Pfizer, PhRMA, Regeneron, Sanofi, and Valeant.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Clinical Decision-Making/methods , Health Personnel , Population Health Management , Population Health , Schizophrenia/therapy , Antipsychotic Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/epidemiology , Double-Blind Method , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Interviews as Topic/methods , Male , Medication Adherence , Schizophrenia/diagnosis , Schizophrenia/epidemiology
18.
J Korean Med Sci ; 36(34): e245, 2021 Aug 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1379958

ABSTRACT

Since February 26, 2021, when vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) began in South Korea, patients who visited the Korea University Guro Hospital with suspected adverse events after COVID-19 vaccination were monitored actively with interest. We encountered five unusual cases of polyarthralgia and myalgia syndrome in patients who received the ChAdOx1 nCOV-19 (AstraZeneca) vaccine. The patients (median age 67 years) were not previously diagnosed with arthropathy and rheumatologic diseases. They developed fever, myalgia, joint pain, and swelling three to seven days after vaccination. The symptoms persisted for up to 47 days despite antipyretic treatment. Arthralgia occurred in multiple joints, including small and large joints. A whole-body Technetium-99m methylene diphosphonate bone scan revealed unusual uptakes in the affected joints. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs with or without prednisolone relieved the symptoms of all patients. Further monitoring is required to clarify the long-term prognosis of this syndrome.


Subject(s)
Arthralgia/etiology , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19/prevention & control , Myalgia/etiology , Vaccination/adverse effects , Adult , Aged , Antipsychotic Agents/therapeutic use , Arthralgia/drug therapy , COVID-19/virology , Female , Humans , Joints/diagnostic imaging , Joints/pathology , Myalgia/drug therapy , Republic of Korea , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
20.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(8): e2118441, 2021 08 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1335942

ABSTRACT

Importance: COVID-19 has had devastating effects on the health and well-being of older adult residents and health care professionals in nursing homes. Uncertainty about the associated consequences of these adverse effects on the use of medications common to this care setting remains. Objective: To examine the association between the COVID-19 pandemic and prescription medication changes among nursing home residents. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study with an interrupted time-series analysis used linked health administrative data bases for residents of all nursing homes (N = 630) in Ontario, Canada. During the observation period, residents were divided into consecutive weekly cohorts. The first observation week was March 5 to 11, 2017; the last observation week was September 20 to 26, 2020. Exposures: Onset of the COVID-19 pandemic on March 1, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Weekly proportion of residents dispensed antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, antidepressants, anticonvulsants, opioids, antibiotics, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. Autoregressive integrated moving average models with step and ramp intervention functions tested for level and slope changes in weekly medication use after the onset of the pandemic and were fit on prepandemic data for projected trends. Results: Across study years, the annual cohort size ranged from 75 850 to 76 549 residents (mean [SD] age, 83.4 [10.8] years; mean proportion of women, 68.9%). A significant increased slope change in the weekly proportion of residents who were dispensed antipsychotics (parameter estimate [ß] = 0.051; standard error [SE] = 0.010; P < .001), benzodiazepines (ß = 0.026; SE = 0.003; P < .001), antidepressants (ß = 0.046; SE = 0.013; P < .001), trazodone hydrochloride (ß = 0.033; SE = 0.010; P < .001), anticonvulsants (ß = 0.014; SE = 0.006; P = .03), and opioids (ß = 0.038; SE = 0.007; P < .001) was observed. The absolute difference in observed vs estimated use in the last week of the pandemic period ranged from 0.48% (for anticonvulsants) to 1.52% (for antipsychotics). No significant level or slope changes were found for antibiotics, ARBs, or ACE inhibitors. Conclusions and Relevance: In this population-based cohort study, statistically significant increases in the use of antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, antidepressants, anticonvulsants, and opioids followed the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, although absolute differences were small. There were no significant changes for antibiotics, ARBs, or ACE inhibitors. Studies are needed to monitor whether changes in pharmacotherapy persist, regress, or accelerate during the course of the pandemic and how these changes affect resident-level outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Drug Prescriptions/statistics & numerical data , Homes for the Aged/statistics & numerical data , Nursing Homes/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Anticonvulsants/therapeutic use , Antidepressive Agents/therapeutic use , Antipsychotic Agents/therapeutic use , Benzodiazepines/therapeutic use , Cohort Studies , Databases, Factual , Female , Humans , Interrupted Time Series Analysis , Male , Ontario , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL