-
Lancet (London, England) Sep 2019Schizophrenia is one of the most common, burdensome, and costly psychiatric disorders in adults worldwide. Antipsychotic drugs are its treatment of choice, but there is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparative efficacy and tolerability of 32 oral antipsychotics for the acute treatment of adults with multi-episode schizophrenia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Schizophrenia is one of the most common, burdensome, and costly psychiatric disorders in adults worldwide. Antipsychotic drugs are its treatment of choice, but there is controversy about which agent should be used. We aimed to compare and rank antipsychotics by quantifying information from randomised controlled trials.
METHODS
We did a network meta-analysis of placebo-controlled and head-to-head randomised controlled trials and compared 32 antipsychotics. We searched Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, BIOSIS, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov from database inception to Jan 8, 2019. Two authors independently selected studies and extracted data. We included randomised controlled trials in adults with acute symptoms of schizophrenia or related disorders. We excluded studies in patients with treatment resistance, first episode, predominant negative or depressive symptoms, concomitant medical illnesses, and relapse-prevention studies. Our primary outcome was change in overall symptoms measured with standardised rating scales. We also extracted data for eight efficacy and eight safety outcomes. Differences in the findings of the studies were explored in metaregressions and sensitivity analyses. Effect size measures were standardised mean differences, mean differences, or risk ratios with 95% credible intervals (CrIs). Confidence in the evidence was assessed using CINeMA (Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis). The study protocol is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42014014919.
FINDINGS
We identified 54 417 citations and included 402 studies with data for 53 463 participants. Effect size estimates suggested all antipsychotics reduced overall symptoms more than placebo (although not statistically significant for six drugs), with standardised mean differences ranging from -0·89 (95% CrI -1·08 to -0·71) for clozapine to -0·03 (-0·59 to 0·52) for levomepromazine (40 815 participants). Standardised mean differences compared with placebo for reduction of positive symptoms (31 179 participants) varied from -0·69 (95% CrI -0·86 to -0·52) for amisulpride to -0·17 (-0·31 to -0·04) for brexpiprazole, for negative symptoms (32 015 participants) from -0·62 (-0·84 to -0·39; clozapine) to -0·10 (-0·45 to 0·25; flupentixol), for depressive symptoms (19 683 participants) from -0·90 (-1·36 to -0·44; sulpiride) to 0·04 (-0·39 to 0·47; flupentixol). Risk ratios compared with placebo for all-cause discontinuation (42 672 participants) ranged from 0·52 (0·12 to 0·95; clopenthixol) to 1·15 (0·36 to 1·47; pimozide), for sedation (30 770 participants) from 0·92 (0·17 to 2·03; pimozide) to 10·20 (4·72 to 29·41; zuclopenthixol), for use of antiparkinson medication (24 911 participants) from 0·46 (0·19 to 0·88; clozapine) to 6·14 (4·81 to 6·55; pimozide). Mean differences compared to placebo for weight gain (28 317 participants) ranged from -0·16 kg (-0·73 to 0·40; ziprasidone) to 3·21 kg (2·10 to 4·31; zotepine), for prolactin elevation (21 569 participants) from -77·05 ng/mL (-120·23 to -33·54; clozapine) to 48·51 ng/mL (43·52 to 53·51; paliperidone) and for QTc prolongation (15 467 participants) from -2·21 ms (-4·54 to 0·15; lurasidone) to 23·90 ms (20·56 to 27·33; sertindole). Conclusions for the primary outcome did not substantially change after adjusting for possible effect moderators or in sensitivity analyses (eg, when excluding placebo-controlled studies). The confidence in evidence was often low or very low.
INTERPRETATION
There are some efficacy differences between antipsychotics, but most of them are gradual rather than discrete. Differences in side-effects are more marked. These findings will aid clinicians in balancing risks versus benefits of those drugs available in their countries. They should consider the importance of each outcome, the patients' medical problems, and preferences.
FUNDING
German Ministry of Education and Research and National Institute for Health Research.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Antipsychotic Agents; Comparative Effectiveness Research; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Schizophrenia; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31303314
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31135-3 -
Biomedicines Dec 2022Evidence about the use of pharmacologic agents in the treatment of Anorexia Nervosa (AN) is lacking, especially in childhood and adolescence. A systematic scoping review... (Review)
Review
Evidence about the use of pharmacologic agents in the treatment of Anorexia Nervosa (AN) is lacking, especially in childhood and adolescence. A systematic scoping review was conducted to outline current literature evidence about the use of antipsychotics in this population. A total of 499 studies were identified with the initial search, and 28 of these studies were selected regarding the use of olanzapine (n = 13), risperidone (n = 4), aripiprazole (n = 3), chlorpromazine (n = 3), pimozide (n = 1) clotiapine (n = 1) and multiple antipsychotics (n = 3) in these patients. Overall, major side effects were reported infrequently; improvements in psychopathology and weight measures have been suggested in the majority of the considered studies. Nonetheless, the lack of RCT or good-quality studies strongly limits the generalizability of results in clinical practice.
PubMed: 36551922
DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines10123167 -
Biomedicines Sep 2023This umbrella review aimed to determine the various drugs used to treat trigeminal neuralgia (TN) and to evaluate their efficacies as well as side effects by surveying... (Review)
Review
This umbrella review aimed to determine the various drugs used to treat trigeminal neuralgia (TN) and to evaluate their efficacies as well as side effects by surveying previously published reviews. An online search was conducted using PubMed, CRD, EBSCO, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library with no limits on publication date or patients' gender, age, and ethnicity. Reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials pertaining to drug therapy for TN, and other relevant review articles added from their reference lists, were evaluated. Rapid reviews, reviews published in languages other than English, and reviews of laboratory studies, case reports, and series were excluded. A total of 588 articles were initially collected; 127 full-text articles were evaluated after removing the duplicates and screening the titles and abstracts, and 11 articles were finally included in this study. Except for carbamazepine, most of the drugs had been inadequately studied. Carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine continue to be the first choice for medication for classical TN. Lamotrigine and baclofen can be regarded as second-line drugs to treat patients not responding to first-line medication or for patients having intolerable side effects from carbamazepine. Drug combinations using carbamazepine, baclofen, gabapentin, ropivacaine, tizanidine, and pimozide can yield satisfactory results and improve the tolerance to the treatment. Intravenous lidocaine can be used to treat acute exaggerations and botulinum toxin-A can be used in refractory cases. Proparacaine, dextromethorphan, and tocainide were reported to be inappropriate for treating TN. Anticonvulsants are successful in managing trigeminal neuralgia; nevertheless, there have been few studies with high levels of proof, making it challenging to compare or even combine their results in a statistically useful way. New research on other drugs, combination therapies, and newer formulations, such as vixotrigine, is awaited. There is conclusive evidence for the efficacy of pharmacological drugs in the treatment of TN.
PubMed: 37892981
DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines11102606 -
European Journal of Human Genetics :... Mar 2024The Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group (DPWG) aims to facilitate pharmacogenetics implementation in clinical practice by developing evidence-based guidelines to...
The Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group (DPWG) aims to facilitate pharmacogenetics implementation in clinical practice by developing evidence-based guidelines to optimize pharmacotherapy. A guideline describing the gene-drug interaction between the genes CYP2D6, CYP3A4 and CYP1A2 and antipsychotics is presented here. The DPWG identified gene-drug interactions that require therapy adjustments when respective genotype is known for CYP2D6 with aripiprazole, brexpiprazole, haloperidol, pimozide, risperidone and zuclopenthixol, and for CYP3A4 with quetiapine. Evidence-based dose recommendations were obtained based on a systematic review of published literature. Reduction of the normal dose is recommended for aripiprazole, brexpiprazole, haloperidol, pimozide, risperidone and zuclopenthixol for CYP2D6-predicted PMs, and for pimozide and zuclopenthixol also for CYP2D6 IMs. For CYP2D6 UMs, a dose increase or an alternative drug is recommended for haloperidol and an alternative drug or titration of the dose for risperidone. In addition, in case of no or limited clinical effect, a dose increase is recommended for zuclopenthixol for CYP2D6 UMs. Even though evidence is limited, the DPWG recommends choosing an alternative drug to treat symptoms of depression or a dose reduction for other indications for quetiapine and CYP3A4 PMs. No therapy adjustments are recommended for the other CYP2D6 and CYP3A4 predicted phenotypes. In addition, no action is required for the gene-drug combinations CYP2D6 and clozapine, flupentixol, olanzapine or quetiapine and also not for CYP1A2 and clozapine or olanzapine. For identified gene-drug interactions requiring therapy adjustments, genotyping of CYP2D6 or CYP3A4 prior to treatment should not be considered for all patients, but on an individual patient basis only.
Topics: Humans; Antipsychotic Agents; Aripiprazole; Clopenthixol; Clozapine; Cytochrome P-450 CYP1A2; Cytochrome P-450 CYP2D6; Cytochrome P-450 CYP3A; Drug Interactions; Haloperidol; Olanzapine; Pharmacogenetics; Pimozide; Quetiapine Fumarate; Quinolones; Risperidone; Thiophenes
PubMed: 37002327
DOI: 10.1038/s41431-023-01347-3 -
The Lancet. Child & Adolescent Health Feb 2023In clinical practice guidelines there is no consensus about the medications that should be initially offered to children and young people with Tourette's syndrome. To... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparative efficacy, tolerability, and acceptability of pharmacological interventions for the treatment of children, adolescents, and young adults with Tourette's syndrome: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
In clinical practice guidelines there is no consensus about the medications that should be initially offered to children and young people with Tourette's syndrome. To provide a rigorous evidence base that could help guide decision making and guideline development, we aimed to compare the efficacy, tolerability, and acceptability of pharmacological interventions for Tourette's syndrome.
METHODS
For this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, Web of Science, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov, for published and unpublished studies from database inception to Nov 19, 2021. We included double-blind randomised controlled trials of any medication administered as a monotherapy for at least 1 week against another medication or placebo in children and adolescents (aged ≥4 years and ≤18 years), adults (>18 years), or both, diagnosed with Tourette's syndrome according to standardised criteria. We excluded studies that exclusively recruited participants with comorbid attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder or obsessive-compulsive disorder. The primary outcome was change in severity of tic symptoms (efficacy). Secondary outcomes were treatment discontinuations due to adverse events (tolerability) and for any reason (acceptability). Pharmacological interventions were examined considering medication categories and medications individually in separate analyses. Summary data were extracted and pooled with a random-effects network meta-analysis to calculate standardised mean differences for efficacy and odds ratios for tolerability and acceptability, with 95% CIs. The Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) framework was used to assess the certainty of evidence. The protocol was pre-registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022296975).
FINDINGS
Of the 12 088 records identified through the database search, 88 records representing 39 randomised controlled trials were included in the network meta-analysis; these 39 randomised controlled trials comprised 4578 participants (mean age 11·8 [SD 4·5] years; 3676 [80·8%] male participants) and evaluated 23 individual medications distributed across six medication categories. When considering medication categories, first-generation (standardised mean difference [SMD] -0·65 [95% CI -0·79 to -0·51]; low certainty of evidence) and second-generation (-0·71 [-0·88 to -0·54]; moderate certainty of evidence) antipsychotic drugs, as well as α-2 agonists (-0·21 [-0·39 to -0·03]; moderate certainty of evidence), were more efficacious than placebo. First-generation and second-generation antipsychotic drugs did not differ from each other (SMD 0·06 [95% CI -0·14 to 0·25]; low certainty of evidence). However, both first-generation (SMD 0·44 [95% CI 0·21 to 0·66]) and second-generation (0·49 [0·25 to 0·74]) antipsychotic drugs outperformed α-2 agonists, with moderate certainty of evidence. Similar findings were observed when individual medications were considered: aripiprazole (SMD -0·60 [95% CI -0·83 to -0·38]), haloperidol (-0·51 [-0·88 to -0·14]), olanzapine (-0·83 [-1·49 to -0·18]), pimozide (-0·48 [-0·84 to -0·12]), risperidone (-0·66 [-0·98 to -0·34]), and clonidine (-0·20 [-0·37 to -0·02]) all outperformed placebo, with moderate certainty of evidence. Antipsychotic medications did not differ from each other, but there was low to very low certainty of evidence for these comparisons. However, aripiprazole (SMD -0·40 [95% CI -0·69 to -0·12]) and risperidone (-0·46 [-0·82 to -0·11]) outperformed clonidine, with moderate certainty of evidence. Heterogeneity or inconsistency only emerged for a few comparisons. In terms of tolerability and acceptability, there were no relevant findings for any of the efficacious medication categories or individual medications against each other or placebo, but there was low to very low certainty of evidence associated with these comparisons.
INTERPRETATION
Our analyses show that antipsychotic drugs are the most efficacious intervention for Tourette's syndrome, while α-2 agonists are also more efficacious than placebo and could be chosen by those who elect not to take antipsychotic drugs. Shared decision making about the degree of tic-related severity and distress or impairment, the trade-offs of efficacy and safety between antipsychotic drugs and α-2 agonists, and other highly relevant individual factors that could not be addressed in the present analysis, should guide the choice of medication for children and young people with Tourette's syndrome.
FUNDING
None.
Topics: Male; Adolescent; Child; Young Adult; Humans; Female; Tourette Syndrome; Antipsychotic Agents; Clonidine; Aripiprazole; Risperidone; Network Meta-Analysis; Tics; Adrenergic alpha-2 Receptor Agonists; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36528030
DOI: 10.1016/S2352-4642(22)00316-9 -
Neurology May 2019To systematically evaluate the efficacy of treatments for tics and the risks associated with their use.
OBJECTIVE
To systematically evaluate the efficacy of treatments for tics and the risks associated with their use.
METHODS
This project followed the methodologies outlined in the 2011 edition of the American Academy of Neurology's guideline development process manual. We included systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials on the treatment of tics that included at least 20 participants (10 participants if a crossover trial), except for neurostimulation trials, for which no minimum sample size was required. To obtain additional information on drug safety, we included cohort studies or case series that specifically evaluated adverse drug effects in individuals with tics.
RESULTS
There was high confidence that the Comprehensive Behavioral Intervention for Tics was more likely than psychoeducation and supportive therapy to reduce tics. There was moderate confidence that haloperidol, risperidone, aripiprazole, tiapride, clonidine, onabotulinumtoxinA injections, 5-ling granule, Ningdong granule, and deep brain stimulation of the globus pallidus were probably more likely than placebo to reduce tics. There was low confidence that pimozide, ziprasidone, metoclopramide, guanfacine, topiramate, and tetrahydrocannabinol were possibly more likely than placebo to reduce tics. Evidence of harm associated with various treatments was also demonstrated, including weight gain, drug-induced movement disorders, elevated prolactin levels, sedation, and effects on heart rate, blood pressure, and ECGs.
CONCLUSIONS
There is evidence to support the efficacy of various medical, behavioral, and neurostimulation interventions for the treatment of tics. Both the efficacy and harms associated with interventions must be considered in making treatment recommendations.
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Behavior Therapy; Deep Brain Stimulation; Humans; Tic Disorders; Tics; Tourette Syndrome
PubMed: 31061209
DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000007467 -
Current Medicinal Chemistry 2018Serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SRIs) and cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy (CBT) are first-line treatments for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). However, a...
BACKGROUND
Serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SRIs) and cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy (CBT) are first-line treatments for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). However, a significant proportion of patients do not respond satisfactorily to first-choice treatments. Several options have been investigated for the management of resistant patients.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of the present paper is to systematically review the available literature concerning the strategies for the treatment of resistant adult patients with OCD.
METHOD
We first reviewed studies concerning the definition of treatment-resistant OCD; we then analyzed results of studies evaluating several different strategies in resistant patients. We limited our review to double-blind, placebo-controlled studies performed in adult patients with OCD whose resistance to a first adequate (in terms of duration and dosage) SRI trial was documented and where outcome was clearly defined in terms of decrease in Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (YBOCS) scores and/or response/ remission rates (according to the YBOCS).
RESULTS
We identified five strategies supported by positive results in placebo-controlled randomized studies: 1) antipsychotic addition to SRIs (16 RCTs, of them 10 positive; 4 head-to-head RCTs); among antipsychotics, available RCTs examined the addition of haloperidol (butyrophenone), pimozide (diphenyl-butylpiperidine), risperidone (SDA: serotonin- dopamine antagonist), paliperidone (SDA), olanzapine (MARTA: multi-acting receptor targeted antipsychotic), quetiapine (MARTA) and aripiprazole (partial dopamine agonist); 2) CBT addition to medication (2 positive RCTs); 3) switch to intravenous clomipramine (SRI) administration (2 positive RCTs); 4) switch to paroxetine (SSRI: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor) or venlafaxine (SNRI: serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor) when the first trial was negative (1 positive RCT); and 5) the addition of medications other than an antipsychotic to SRIs (18 RCTs performed with several different compounds, with only 4 positive studies).
CONCLUSION
Treatment-resistant OCD remains a significant challenge to psychiatrists. To date, the most effective strategy is the addition of antipsychotics (aripiprazole and risperidone) to SRIs; another effective strategy is CBT addition to medications. Other strategies, such as the switch to another first-line treatment or the switch to intravenous administration are promising but need further confirmation in double-blind studies. The addition of medications other than antipsychotics remains to be studied, as several negative studies exist and positive ones need confirmation (only 1 positive study).
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Drug Resistance; Drug Substitution; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29278206
DOI: 10.2174/0929867325666171222163645 -
The Journal of Dermatological Treatment Mar 2022Delusional infestation (DI) is a rare delusional disorder in which individuals have a false belief that they are infested with bugs, parasites, or insects, despite the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Delusional infestation (DI) is a rare delusional disorder in which individuals have a false belief that they are infested with bugs, parasites, or insects, despite the lack of medical evidence that such an infestation exists. Data on the effectiveness of antipsychotics for DI are limited.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review using EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception of the databases up until July 20, 2018. Studies examining typical or atypical antipsychotics for primary DI were included.
RESULTS
A total of 51 relevant articles were identified, primarily case reports/series. Overall response was favorable for both typical and atypical antipsychotics, but there was no strong evidence to suggest that any one antipsychotic agent was preferable to other agents. Pimozide (1-16 mg/day) and risperidone (0.5-8 mg/day) were the most commonly studied typical and atypical antipsychotics, respectively. Inconsistent reporting of treatment outcomes and variability in study designs limited the overall evaluation of the data.
CONCLUSIONS
There remains a lack of sound data supporting the effectiveness of antipsychotic treatment for primary DI. Further research is required to establish more definitive conclusions about the relative clinical utility of antipsychotic agents for DI.
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Humans; Risperidone; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32658556
DOI: 10.1080/09546634.2020.1795061 -
Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. Revue... May 2015It remains unclear whether antipsychotic polypharmacy, a common clinical practice, is related to an increased risk of corrected time between start of Q wave and end of T... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
It remains unclear whether antipsychotic polypharmacy, a common clinical practice, is related to an increased risk of corrected time between start of Q wave and end of T wave (QTc) interval prolongation. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to address this important issue.
METHOD
A systematic literature search was conducted in October 2014, using MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO. Studies and case reports were included if they reported QTc intervals or QTc interval changes before and after antipsychotic polypharmacy or QTc intervals in both antipsychotic polypharmacy and monotherapy groups.
RESULTS
A total of 21 articles (10 clinical trials, 4 observational studies, and 7 case reports) met inclusion criteria. The clinical trials have shown that a combination treatment with risperidone or pimozide is not obviously related to an increase in QTc interval, whereas ziprasidone or sertindole combined with clozapine may prolong QTc interval. Among the 4 observational studies, antipsychotic polypharmacy was not clearly associated with QTc prolongation in 3 studies, each cross-sectional. In contrast, one prospective study showed a significant increase in QTc interval following antipsychotic coadministration. The case reports indicated an increased risk of QTc prolongation in at least some patients receiving antipsychotic polypharmacy.
CONCLUSIONS
Currently available evidence fails to confirm that antipsychotic polypharmacy worsens QTc prolongation in general, although the evidence is scarce and inconsistent. Clinicians are advised to remain conservative in resorting to antipsychotic polypharmacy, as a combination of some QTc-prolongation liable antipsychotics may further prolong QTc interval, and efficacy supporting the clinical benefits of antipsychotic polypharmacy is equivocal, at best.
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Heart Rate; Humans; Polypharmacy
PubMed: 26174525
DOI: 10.1177/070674371506000503 -
BMC Psychiatry Jul 2015Tic disorders (TDs) are common neuropsychiatric disorders in children. Typical antipsychotics, such as haloperidol and pimozide have been prescribed to control tic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Tic disorders (TDs) are common neuropsychiatric disorders in children. Typical antipsychotics, such as haloperidol and pimozide have been prescribed to control tic symptoms as first-line agents. However, adverse effects have led to the use of newer atypical antipsychotics. Aripiprazole is one of alternatives. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of aripiprazole for children with TDs.
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and control studies evaluating aripiprazole for children with tic disorders were identified from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, Cochrane Central, four Chinese database and relevant reference lists. Quality assessment referred to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.
RESULTS
Twelve studies involving 935 participants were included. The general quality of included studies was poor. Only one study used placebo as a control and others used positive drug controls. Participants were aged between 4 and 18 years. The period of treatment ranged from 8 to 12 weeks. Seven studies (N = 600 patients) used the YGTSS scale as the outcome measurement, and there was no significant difference in reduction of the total YGTSS score between the aripiprazole and positive control groups (MD = -0.48, 95 % CI [-6.22, 5.26], P = 0.87, I(2) = 87 %). Meta-analysis of four of the studies (N = 285 patients) that compared aripiprazole with haloperidol showed that there was no significant difference in reduction of the total YGTSS score (MD = 2.50, 95 % CI [-6.93, 11.92], P = 0.60, I(2) = 88 %). Meta-analysis of two studies (N = 255 patients) that compared aripiprazole with tiapride showed that there was no significant difference in reduction of the total YGTSS score (MD = -3.15, 95 % CI [-11.38, 5.09], P = 0.45, I(2) = 86 %). Adverse events (AEs) were reported in 11 studies. Drowsiness (5.1 %-58.1 %), increased appetite (3.2 %-25.8 %), nausea (2 %-18.8 %) and headache (2 %-16.1 %) were common AEs.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, aripiprazole appears to be a promising therapy for children with TDs. Further well-conducted RCTs are required to confirm this issue.
Topics: Adolescent; Antipsychotic Agents; Aripiprazole; Child; Child, Preschool; Haloperidol; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tic Disorders; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26220447
DOI: 10.1186/s12888-015-0504-z