Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33489087›Full record

ArticleTherapeutic advances in psychopharmacology2020

Reasons for initiating long-acting antipsychotics in psychiatric practice: findings from the STAR Network Depot Study.

Corrado Barbui, Federico Bertolini, Francesco Bartoli, Carmela Calandra, Camilla Callegari, Giuseppe Carrà, Armando D'Agostino, Claudio Lucii, Giovanni Martinotti, Daniele Mastromo and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutic advances in psychopharmacology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotic Treatment during Pregnancy: A Case Series.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 10 institutions in 2 countries.

Corrado BarbuiWHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Training in Mental Health and Service Evaluation; Department of Neuroscience, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences; Section of Psychiatry, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Federico BertoliniWHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Training in Mental Health and Service Evaluation; Department of Neuroscience, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences; Section of Psychiatry, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Francesco BartoliDepartment of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano Bicocca, Monza, Italy.
Carmela CalandraDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences and Advanced Technologies 'G.F. Ingrassia', University Hospital Policlinico-Vittorio Emanuele, Catania, Italy.
Camilla CallegariDepartment of Medicine and Surgery, Division of Psychiatry, University of Insubria-ASST Sette Laghi, Varese, Italy.
Giuseppe CarràDepartment of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano Bicocca, Monza, Italy.
Armando D'AgostinoDepartment of Health Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Claudio LuciiUOC Psichiatria Siena, Azienda USL Toscana Sudest, Siena, Italy.
Giovanni MartinottiDepartment of Neuroscience, Imaging and Clinical Sciences, University 'G. d'Annunzio', Chieti, Italy.
Daniele MastromoDipartimento Salute Mentale e Dipendenze, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda Milano, Milano, Italy.
Daniele MorettiASL2 Regione Liguria, Centro di Salute Mentale di Finale Ligure, Savona, Italy.
Emiliano MonzaniDipartimento Salute Mentale e delle Dipendenze, ASST Bergamo Ovest, Treviglio (Bergamo), Italy.
Matteo PorcellanaDipartimento Salute Mentale e Dipendenze, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda Milano, Milano, Italy.
Davide PrestiaDepartment of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics and Infant-Maternal Science, Section of Psychiatry, University of Genoa, Italy.
Giovanni OstuzziDepartment of Neuroscience, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, Section of Psychiatry, University of Verona, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, 10, Verona, 37134, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2248-9524
STAR Network Investigators
University of Verona · ITAzienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Policlinico - Vittorio Emanuele · ITAzienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale di Bergamo OvestOspedale Policlinico San Martino · ITRegione LiguriaUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Chieti-Pescara · ITUniversity of Insubria · ITUniversity of Milan · ITUniversity of Milano-Bicocca · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLong acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics have been claimed to ensure treatment adherence and possibly reduce the daily burden of oral formulations. So far, only surveys investigating the theoretical prescribing attitudes of clinicians have been employed. On this basis, we aimed to investigate reasons for prescribing LAIs in a real-world, unselected sample of patients.

methodsThe STAR Network Depot Study is an observational, multicentre study consecutively enrolling adults initiating a LAI over a 12-months period. Clinical severity was assessed with the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, and patient's attitude toward medications with the Drug Attitude Inventory 10 items. Psychiatrists recorded reasons for LAI prescribing for each study participant. Responses were grouped into six non-mutually exclusive categories: aggressiveness, patient engagement, ease of drug taking, side-effects, stigma, adherence.

resultsOf the 451 patients included, two-thirds suffered from chronic psychoses. Improving patient engagement with the outpatient psychiatric service was the most common reason for prescribing LAIs (almost 80% of participants), followed by increasing treatment adherence (57%), decreasing aggressiveness (54%), and improving ease of drug taking (52%). After adjusting for confounders, logistic regression analyses showed that reasons for LAI use were associated with LAI choice (e.g. first-generation LAIs for reducing aggressiveness).

conclusionDespite the wide availability of novel LAI formulation and the emphasis on their wider use, our data suggest that the main reasons for LAI use have remained substantially unchanged over the years, focusing mostly on improving patient's engagement. Further, clinicians follow implicit prescribing patterns when choosing LAIs, and this may generate hypotheses for future experimental studies.

Indexed as

antipsychoticlong-acting injectableprescribing attitudespsychiatric practicesurvey

Identifiers

PMID33489087
PMCPMC7768845
OpenAlexW3116783343

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.