ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2003
Short-acting parenteral antipsychotics drive choice for classical versus atypical agents.
Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A meta-analysis of the risk of acute extrapyramidal symptoms with intramuscular antipsychotics for the treatment of agitation.The Journal of clinical psychiatry · 2008Pooled it
- The effect of non-adherence to antipsychotic treatment on rehospitalization in patients with psychotic disorders.Therapeutic advances in psychopharmacology · 2021Article
- Predicting rehospitalization in patients treated with antipsychotics: a prospective observational study.Therapeutic advances in psychopharmacology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study was to investigate which antipsychotics (classical versus atypical) are prescribed in a psychiatric hospital and which determinants affect the choice for one of these two classes of antipsychotics in newly admitted patients.
methodsIn a retrospective cohort design, 522 newly admitted patients were followed from the date of admission until discharge from the hospital. In the cohort of newly admitted patients treated with an oral antipsychotic, a nested case-control study was conducted considering recipients of an atypical agent as cases. Controls were all other cohort members. The association of patient characteristics and the choice between classical versus atypical antipsychotics was studied using logistic regression analysis. The same analysis was performed with adjustment for possible confounding factors (age group, gender, DSM-IV diagnoses, use of short-acting parenteral antipsychotic, global assessment of functioning score, involuntary admissions and involuntary measures).
resultsPatients treated with classical oral antipsychotics were more often previously treated with short-acting parenteral antipsychotics than patients treated with atypical antipsychotics (40.8% vs 15.2%; adjusted OR=0.20 95% CI=0.09-0.44). No statistically significant difference was found between patients with different severities of disease. DISCUSSION: Availability of injectable forms seems to drive the choice for oral antipsychotic agents. Future introductions of short-acting parenteral atypical antipsychotics may have a large impact on first-choice oral antipsychotic treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
12634982What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.