Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10796340›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2000

Depot fluphenazine for schizophrenia.

C E Adams, M Eisenbruch

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 194 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Suicide in Schizophrenia: An Educational Overview.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2019
    Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

C E AdamsCochrane Schizophrenia Group, Summertown Pavilion, Middle Way, Summertown, Oxford, UK, OX2 7LG. clive.adams@psych.ox.ac.uk
M Eisenbruch
Cochrane · GBKing's College School · GBUniversity of Sheffield · GBUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the years after the discovery of oral antipsychotic medications, it became clear that there was a link between stopping medication and relapse of psychotic symptoms. A series of long-acting preparations was developed. These depot preparations, are frequently used for those who find taking oral medication on a regular basis difficult or unacceptable. However, it has been a consistent concern that any reduction in relapse rate afforded by the depot preparations may be offset by an increase in undesirable side effects. There is one oral preparation and two depot forms (enanthate (Moditen) and decanoate (Modecate)). The decanoate form is more frequently used but both versions were reviewed in this work.

objectivesTo compare depot fluphenazine medication to oral fluphenazine for treatment of schizophrenia. SEARCH STRATEGY: Electronic searches of Biological Abstracts, CSG's Register, EMBASE, LILACS, MEDLINE, PsycLIT, SCISEARCH, hand searching the references of all identified studies and contacting the manufacturers of the compounds. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised clinical trials that compared fluphenazine enanthate or fluphenazine decanoate to oral fluphenazine for people with schizophrenia or other psychoses were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: One reviewer (CEA) inspected study citations and then the second reviewer (ME) independently inspected 20% of citations to ensure reliability. Full reports of the studies of agreed relevance were obtained and data extracted in the same manner by the authors. Trials were allocated to three quality categories, as described in the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook. Data were analysed on an intention-to-treat basis, and, where possible, parametric continuous data were presented. Tests for heterogeneity were undertaken. MAIN

resultsData were very limited. There was no difference between fluphenazine hydrochloride and its depot form for outcomes such as global impression of functioning, relapse/re-hospitalisation, poor initial response to treatment, leaving the study early, depressed mood / suicide and side effects such as movement disorders, uncomfortable dry mouth, sleep problems and weight gain were equally common in both groups. Direct measures of mental state, social functioning and satisfaction with care were either not measured or presented in such as way as to make any analysis impossible. REVIEWER'S

conclusionsAll six included studies relate to people with schizophrenia who are already stable on oral fluphenazine or seem contented to stay in the studies. How the data from this review relate to everyday psychiatric practices, where compliance with medication is more problematic, is debatable. The use of depot fluphenazine continues to be based on clinical judgement rather than evidence from methodical evaluation within trials. A large pragmatic randomized controlled trial is long overdue.

Indexed as

Antipsychotic AgentsDelayed-Action PreparationsFluphenazineHumansSchizophreniaAntipsychotic AgentsDelayed-Action PreparationsFluphenazinefluphenazine depot

Identifiers

PMID10796340
OpenAlexW2401924872

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.