Assessment and Treatment Selection for “Revolving Door” Inpatients with Schizophrenia

Assessment and Treatment Selection for “Revolving Door” Inpatients with Schizophrenia Goals: The goals of this study are 1) to determine causes and patterns of relapse for a cohort of “revolving door” schizophrenia inpatients, and 2) to assess the feasibility of starting a new psychopharmacologic intervention before discharge, either depot therapy or an atypical antipsychotic. Methods: Consecutive admissions to an acute inpatient unit in New York City were screened for “revolving door” criteria. Patients had to have a primary diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder and have either 1) two hospitalizations in the last year, or 2) three hospitalizations in the last three years. Patients were then assessed for probable causes of relapse for the index and prior two hospitalizations. Treatment selection, based on this information, was trichotomized to: 1) oral conventional antipsychotic, 2) depot conventional antipsychotic (either haloperidol or fluphenazine decanoate), or 3) atypical antipsychotic (either risperidone or clozapine). Results: Sixty-three out of 131 screened admissions met the above revolving door criteria. They were indeed “revolving”, having an average of 1.3 hospitalizations per year over the last 3 years and were only out of the hospital for five months (median) before index admission. The treatment selection process was hampered by lack of information about events leading to relapse, and by the lack of outpatient participation in the medication selection process. Of the 50 patients with complete histories about precipitants for the index episode, the most common reason for rehospitalization was judged to be medication non-compliance (n = 25; 50%), followed by medication nonresponse (n = 13; 26%). Not surprisingly, medication recommendations were closely linked to the assessed reason for relapse (depot therapy [n = 27; 49%] with medication non-compliance; atypical antipsychotic [n = 20; 37%] with medication nonresponse [X2 = 26.9, p<.001]).These two recommendations were implemented before discharge for about one-half of the cases. Patient refusal was a relatively greater problem for depot recommendation while constraints in the outpatient environment were more problematic for patients recommended for atypical antipsychotics. Conclusions: Medication noncompliance and medication nonresponse, in that order, were judged to be the most common causes of relapse for “revolving door” inpatients. Both depot therapy and atypical antipsychotics were commonly recommended and ultimately accepted by about 2/3rds of patients. Choice between depot and atypical was driven by the assessed cause of relapse. In summary, it seems possible to identify “revolving door” inpatients, and to target specific medication interventions within the time frame of an acute inpatient admission. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Psychiatric Quarterly Springer Journals

Assessment and Treatment Selection for “Revolving Door” Inpatients with Schizophrenia

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/assessment-and-treatment-selection-for-revolving-door-inpatients-with-iRt3LbgoDP
Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 1997 by Human Sciences Press, Inc.
Subject
Medicine & Public Health; Psychiatry; Public Health; Sociology, general
ISSN
0033-2720
eISSN
1573-6709
D.O.I.
10.1023/A:1025499131905
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Goals: The goals of this study are 1) to determine causes and patterns of relapse for a cohort of “revolving door” schizophrenia inpatients, and 2) to assess the feasibility of starting a new psychopharmacologic intervention before discharge, either depot therapy or an atypical antipsychotic. Methods: Consecutive admissions to an acute inpatient unit in New York City were screened for “revolving door” criteria. Patients had to have a primary diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder and have either 1) two hospitalizations in the last year, or 2) three hospitalizations in the last three years. Patients were then assessed for probable causes of relapse for the index and prior two hospitalizations. Treatment selection, based on this information, was trichotomized to: 1) oral conventional antipsychotic, 2) depot conventional antipsychotic (either haloperidol or fluphenazine decanoate), or 3) atypical antipsychotic (either risperidone or clozapine). Results: Sixty-three out of 131 screened admissions met the above revolving door criteria. They were indeed “revolving”, having an average of 1.3 hospitalizations per year over the last 3 years and were only out of the hospital for five months (median) before index admission. The treatment selection process was hampered by lack of information about events leading to relapse, and by the lack of outpatient participation in the medication selection process. Of the 50 patients with complete histories about precipitants for the index episode, the most common reason for rehospitalization was judged to be medication non-compliance (n = 25; 50%), followed by medication nonresponse (n = 13; 26%). Not surprisingly, medication recommendations were closely linked to the assessed reason for relapse (depot therapy [n = 27; 49%] with medication non-compliance; atypical antipsychotic [n = 20; 37%] with medication nonresponse [X2 = 26.9, p<.001]).These two recommendations were implemented before discharge for about one-half of the cases. Patient refusal was a relatively greater problem for depot recommendation while constraints in the outpatient environment were more problematic for patients recommended for atypical antipsychotics. Conclusions: Medication noncompliance and medication nonresponse, in that order, were judged to be the most common causes of relapse for “revolving door” inpatients. Both depot therapy and atypical antipsychotics were commonly recommended and ultimately accepted by about 2/3rds of patients. Choice between depot and atypical was driven by the assessed cause of relapse. In summary, it seems possible to identify “revolving door” inpatients, and to target specific medication interventions within the time frame of an acute inpatient admission.

Journal

Psychiatric QuarterlySpringer Journals

Published: Oct 14, 2004

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off