Substance use disorders in patients with intellectual disability admitted to psychiatric hospitalisation.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have looked at the prevalence of substance use disorders (SUD) in people with intellectual disability (ID). The results range between 1% and 6.4% and go up to 20% in people with ID and psychiatric disorders, probably underestimating real prevalence due to several limitations in these studies. ID confers risk for the development of SUD, which in turn will involve negative psychosocial and clinical consequences. We aimed to study the prevalence of SUD in a sample of patients with ID admitted to a brief hospitalisation psychiatric unit, describing them by type and severity and analysing their relationship with clinical, prognostic and access to treatment variables. METHODS: We undertook a descriptive, cross-sectional and retrospective study by means of a review of clinical histories of all patients with a diagnosis of ID, admitted in a period of 10 years. RESULTS: Among the final sample of patients included, 52.3% had a mild ID, 40.9% an unspecified ID, 3.4% a moderate ID and another 3.4% a severe ID. More than one third of the sample met criteria for a SUD. The main SUD was cannabis use disorder (25%), followed by alcohol use disorder (22.7%) and cocaine use disorder (13.6%). The use of more than one substance was the most frequent pattern. Cannabis use disorder and cocaine use disorder were overrepresented in the group with mild ID. A greater number of psychiatric admissions was observed for the group with SUD. Specialised mental health services for ID and specialised addiction network facilities were much less involved in the care of these patients that could be expected according to good clinical practice recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Substance use disorder in patients with ID and mental health disorders admitted to psychiatric hospitalisation are prevalent, which makes this issue an area of interest for future improvements in case identification, proper referring to specialised treatment resources and an increasing research focusing on specific therapeutic approaches.

Clinical and serotonergic predictors of non-affective acute remitting psychosis in patients with a first-episode psychosis.

OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to establish clinical predictors of non-affective acute remitting psychosis (NARP) and assess whether these patients showed a distinct serotonergic profile. METHOD: First-episode never treated psychotic patients diagnosed of paranoid schizophrenia (n=35; 21 men and 14 women) or NARP (n=28; 15 men and 13 women) were included. RESULTS: NARP patients showed significantly lower negative symptomatology, better premorbid adjustment, shorter duration of untreated psychosis, more depressive symptomatology and a lower number of 5-HT2A receptors than the paranoid schizophrenia patients. In the logistic regression, the four variables associated with the presence of NARP were: low number of 5-HT2A receptors; good premorbid adjustment; low score in the item 'hallucinatory behaviour' and reduced duration of untreated psychosis. CONCLUSION: Our findings support the view that NARP is a highly distinctive condition different from either affective psychosis or other non-affective psychosis such as schizophrenia, and highlight the need for its validation.

Lower weight gain with the orally disintegrating olanzapine than with standard tablets in first-episode never treated psychotic patients.

OBJECTIVE: A post-hoc analysis of the data from a randomised clinical trial involving prescription of antipsychotic treatment to never treated first-onset psychotic patients was used to compare the weight change after 6-week olanzapine treatment (standard tablets vs. orally disintegrating formulation). METHOD: In the subgroup of 38 patients randomised to olanzapine, standard olanzapine tablets were non-randomly and consecutively prescribed to the first 19 patients, with the orally disintegrating formulation being prescribed to the following 19 patients. RESULTS: After 6-week treatment with olanzapine, a significant higher increase in weight was noted in those patients on standard tablets (mean weight increase 6.3 +/- 1.9 Kg) as compared to those on orally disintegrating olanzapine (mean weight increase 3.3 +/- 3.2 Kg) (F = 7.7; p = 0.009). BMI increase was also significantly higher in the olanzapine tablet group (mean increase of 2.1 Kg/m(2) as compared with 1.1 Kg/m(2) in the orally disintegrating group) (F = 4.7; p = 0.036). Substantial weight gain (SWG) (> or =7% increase from baseline weight) was noted in 84.2% (n = 16) of the olanzapine tablet patients and in 31.6% (n = 6) of the orally disintegrating olanzapine patients, with the olanzapine tablet group showing a significant increase in the mean percentage of weight gain (F = 4.0; p = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Partial sublingual absorption occurring with orally disintegrating olanzapine may bypass gastrointestinal metabolisation and hence lead to differences in metabolite versus parent compound ratios. However, the need arises to replicate the present study with a longer follow-up.