Optimization of psychopharmacotherapy for schizophrenia in a male, locked, non-acute unit serving for persistently ill patients over one year.

We describe real-world psychopharmacological treatment in a Japanese, male, closed psychiatric unit where clozapie was still unavailable. Fifty-five persistently-ill patients with schizophrenia (ICD-10), mean ± S.D. age: 57.5 ± 13.0 y.o., duration of illness and admissions: 30.9 ± 15.2 years and 20.7 ± 14.5 years, respectively) treated longitudinally were evaluated. The rule was to treat with a simplest possible psychotropic regimen without polypharmacy. Compared to the baseline, the number and dose of antipsychotics were reduced from 1.9 to 1.1 and 1012 mg/day to 607 mg/day, respectively. The number of total psychotropics was minimized from 4.7 to 2.1, with a simplified once or twice daily dosing. Overall, the CGI-Severity and FACT-Sz (global functioning) improved slightly from 5.8 to 5.5 and 28.7 to 32.6, respectively. Of note, no patients got worse in comparison with the baseline clinical presentation. Forty-four patients were successfully treated with a single antipsychotic; only seven needed two antipsychotics simultaneously while 36 had been treated with antipsychotic polypharmacy at baseline. Benzodiazepines (mostly lorazepam) and antiparkinsonian drugs were prescribed in 28 and only two, respectively. Nineteen needed adjunctive valproate (average blood levels: 99.3 ± 21.8 µg/mL) and nine used lithium (0.61 ± 0.26 mEq/L). Optimization of psychopharmacotherapy is still possible for difficult-to-treat patients and, while augmentation of an antipsychotic with mood stabilizers is frequently needed, antipsychotic polypharmacy should be exceptional.

Relationships between global assessment of functioning and other rating scales in clinical trials for schizophrenia.

The relationship between the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) with other scales in schizophrenia has rarely been investigated. A systematic literature search was conducted to identify articles that reported the GAF score together with scores in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), Clinical Global Impression (CGI) or Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), using MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO, with keywords of schizophrenia, clinical trial and global assessment of functioning (last search 30 June 2013). Correlational analyses with weighting by the study participant numbers across these rating scales were performed. In 40 clinical trials (n=8000) that reported cross-sectional data on the GAF and PANSS, a significant but modest correlation was noted (Pearson׳s r=-0.401, p<0.0001). Furthermore, a correlation between the GAF and CGI-severity (CGI-S) at study baseline in 38 studies (n=11,315) was robust (r=-0.893, p<0.0001). In longitudinal studies, changes in the GAF scores were negatively correlated with those in the PANSS as well as CGI-S scores (p<0.0001 for both). Data on the BPRS were all statistically significant although relatively scarce. While optimal degree of concordance is undetermined among psychiatric scales that are presumed to be measuring different but overlapping constructs, this study found significant correlations in the GAF and CGI-S or PANSS, both cross-sectionally and longitudinally. The GAF-CGI-S relationship was especially tighter, making it a reliable clinical indicator.