ArticleInnovations in clinical neuroscience2013
Sialorrhea and aspiration pneumonia: a case study.
Article in Innovations in clinical neuroscience, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of the association between clozapine and norclozapine serum levels and peripheral adverse drug reactions.Psychopharmacology · 2021Pooled it
- Elevated Clozapine Concentrations in Clozapine-Treated Patients with Hypersalivation.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2021Article
- Management of common adverse effects of antipsychotic medications.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2018Article
- Real-World Medication Treatment Patterns for Long-Term Care Residents with Dementia-Related Psychosis.Gerontology & geriatric medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This case study compares two different clinical outcomes for a patient with a long-standing psychotic disorder prescribed clozapine on two occasions. During the first trial, clozapine was used at a higher dose for this patient (350-450mg/day) and included clinically significant sialorrhea, pneumonia, and pneumonia-like illnesses requiring immediate medical intervention including hospitalization. There were also patient complaints of fatigue, cough, choking, and constipation leading to poor adherence. Clozapine was discontinued when the patient withdrew his consent due to side effects, despite his awareness of its benefits, including reduction of command hallucinations and irritability. The second clozapine trial was associated with lower daily doses and therapeutic serum blood levels. The patient was actively participating in and adhering to the medication plan. A very narrow window of clozapine dose was exceeded for two days and the patient complained of hypersalivation, cough, and lethargy. He was subsequently hospitalized for a two week period to treat aspiration pneumonia. This hospitalization helped establish the ideal daily dose of clozapine for this patient and also brought the relationship between aspiration pneumonia and clozapine to the attention of the psychiatrist and medical specialist. Once the appropriate dosage for this patient was established, his psychotic and affective symptoms were controlled, he was not hampered by adverse side effects, and he started to actively participate in social and recreational activities and plans that culminated in discharge from a state psychiatric facility to a supportive community residence. It is our hope that the lessons we have learned from our shared experience with this patient will be of benefit to other clinicians and patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23882437PMC3719458W9743863What 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.