Browsing by Author "Correll, Christoph U. (57203102810)"

Objectives: This survey assessed psychiatry residents’/early-career psychiatrists’ attitudes towards the utility of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of antipsychotics. Methods: A previously developed questionnaire on attitudes on TDM utility during antipsychotic treatment was cross-sectionally disseminated by national coordinators between 01/01/2022–31/12/2023. The frequency of using TDM for antipsychotics other than clozapine was the main outcome in a linear regression analysis, including sex, clinical setting, caseload, and factors generated by an exploratory factor analysis. Comparisons between residents and early-career psychiatrists, respondents working in in- and outpatient settings, and low-/middle- and high–income countries were performed. Results: Altogether, 1,237 respondents completed the survey, with 37.9% having never used TDM for antipsychotics. Seven factors explained 41% of response variance; six of them were associated with frequency of TDM use (p < 0.05). Items with highest loadings for factors included clinical benefits of TDM (factors A and E: 0.7), negative expectations for beliefs of patients towards TDM (factor B: 0.6–0.7), weak TDM scientific evidence (factor C: 0.8), and TDM availability (factor D: −0.8). Respondents from low-/middle-income countries were less likely to frequently/almost always use TDM compared to high-income countries (9.4% vs. 21.5%, p < 0.001). Discussion: TDM use for antipsychotics was poor and associated with limited knowledge and insufficient availability. © 2024 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

Objectives: This survey assessed psychiatry residents’/early-career psychiatrists’ attitudes towards the utility of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of antipsychotics. Methods: A previously developed questionnaire on attitudes on TDM utility during antipsychotic treatment was cross-sectionally disseminated by national coordinators between 01/01/2022–31/12/2023. The frequency of using TDM for antipsychotics other than clozapine was the main outcome in a linear regression analysis, including sex, clinical setting, caseload, and factors generated by an exploratory factor analysis. Comparisons between residents and early-career psychiatrists, respondents working in in- and outpatient settings, and low-/middle- and high–income countries were performed. Results: Altogether, 1,237 respondents completed the survey, with 37.9% having never used TDM for antipsychotics. Seven factors explained 41% of response variance; six of them were associated with frequency of TDM use (p < 0.05). Items with highest loadings for factors included clinical benefits of TDM (factors A and E: 0.7), negative expectations for beliefs of patients towards TDM (factor B: 0.6–0.7), weak TDM scientific evidence (factor C: 0.8), and TDM availability (factor D: −0.8). Respondents from low-/middle-income countries were less likely to frequently/almost always use TDM compared to high-income countries (9.4% vs. 21.5%, p < 0.001). Discussion: TDM use for antipsychotics was poor and associated with limited knowledge and insufficient availability. © 2024 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

Purpose: Although first-episode psychosis (FEP) in youth, particularly early-onset schizophrenia (EOS), is managed similarly to adult-onset schizophrenia, few antipsychotics are approved for people aged 13–18 years. We aimed to explore areas of uncertainty in EOS management and provide evidence-based recommendations to mental health specialists. We used the Delphi methodology to gain knowledge in areas lacking evidence-based strategies. This standardized methodology consists of the development of a questionnaire by content experts, which is then submitted to a broader panel of professionals (panelists) to survey their level of agreement on the topics proposed. Materials and Methods: The developed questionnaire covered patient management from diagnosis to maintenance treatment and was administered to a broader panel of specialists across Europe. Based on an analysis of responses received in this first round, the items that needed further insight were submitted to the panel for a second round and then reanalysed. Results: An initial set of 90 items was developed; in round I, consensus was reached for 83/90 items (92%), while it was reached for 7/11 (64%) of the items sent out for rerating in round II. Feedback for rounds I and II was obtained from 54/92 and 48/54 approached experts, respectively. There was broad agreement on diagnostic standards, multimodal approaches and focus on adverse events, but uncertainty in terms of pharmacological strategies (including clozapine) in case of failure and antipsychotic dosing in younger patients. Conclusion: Despite knowledge about diagnostic clues and integrated management of EOS, this study highlights the lack of standardization in treating EOS, with safety arguments having a major role in the decision-making process. Targeted clinical trials and systematic dissemination across Europe of current scientific evidence on the value of early intervention services is hoped to contribute to standardized and improved quality care for patients with early-phase psychosis and schizophrenia. © 2022 Correll et al.

Purpose: Although first-episode psychosis (FEP) in youth, particularly early-onset schizophrenia (EOS), is managed similarly to adult-onset schizophrenia, few antipsychotics are approved for people aged 13–18 years. We aimed to explore areas of uncertainty in EOS management and provide evidence-based recommendations to mental health specialists. We used the Delphi methodology to gain knowledge in areas lacking evidence-based strategies. This standardized methodology consists of the development of a questionnaire by content experts, which is then submitted to a broader panel of professionals (panelists) to survey their level of agreement on the topics proposed. Materials and Methods: The developed questionnaire covered patient management from diagnosis to maintenance treatment and was administered to a broader panel of specialists across Europe. Based on an analysis of responses received in this first round, the items that needed further insight were submitted to the panel for a second round and then reanalysed. Results: An initial set of 90 items was developed; in round I, consensus was reached for 83/90 items (92%), while it was reached for 7/11 (64%) of the items sent out for rerating in round II. Feedback for rounds I and II was obtained from 54/92 and 48/54 approached experts, respectively. There was broad agreement on diagnostic standards, multimodal approaches and focus on adverse events, but uncertainty in terms of pharmacological strategies (including clozapine) in case of failure and antipsychotic dosing in younger patients. Conclusion: Despite knowledge about diagnostic clues and integrated management of EOS, this study highlights the lack of standardization in treating EOS, with safety arguments having a major role in the decision-making process. Targeted clinical trials and systematic dissemination across Europe of current scientific evidence on the value of early intervention services is hoped to contribute to standardized and improved quality care for patients with early-phase psychosis and schizophrenia. © 2022 Correll et al.