-
Acta Neuropsychiatrica Apr 2023Several augmentation strategies have been used to improve symptomatology in patients not adequately responding to clozapine. Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Several augmentation strategies have been used to improve symptomatology in patients not adequately responding to clozapine. Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have evaluated the efficacy of different strategies to augment clozapine. This systematic review and meta-analysis reviewed the available RCTs that have evaluated the clinical efficacy of various pharmacological agents, non-pharmacological strategies (occupational therapy, cognitive behaviour therapy), and somatic treatment [electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, etc.)] as augmenting agents to clozapine.
METHODS
Data were extracted using standard procedures, and risk of bias was evaluated. Effect sizes were computed for the individual studies.
RESULTS
Forty-five clinical trials were evaluated. The pooled effect size for various antipsychotic medications was 0.103 (95% CI: 0.288-0.493, < 0.001); when the effect size was evaluated for specific antipsychotics for which more than one trial was available, the effect size for risperidone was -0.27 and that for aripiprazole was 0.57. The effect size for lamotrigine was 0.145, and that for topiramate was 0.392. The effect size for ECT was 0.743 (CI: 0.094-1.392). Risk of bias was low (mean Jadad score - 3.93). Largest effect sizes were seen for mirtazapine (effect size of 5.265). Most of the studies can be considered underpowered and limited by small sample sizes.
CONCLUSIONS
To conclude, based on the findings of the present systematic review and meta-analysis, it can be said that compared to other treatment strategies, clozapine non-responsive patients respond maximum to mirtazapine followed by ECT.
Topics: Humans; Clozapine; Schizophrenia; Mirtazapine; Antipsychotic Agents; Risperidone
PubMed: 36380513
DOI: 10.1017/neu.2022.30 -
Health Technology Assessment... Oct 2016Nausea and vomiting in pregnancy (NVP) affects up to 85% of all women during pregnancy, but for the majority self-management suffices. For the remainder, symptoms are... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Nausea and vomiting in pregnancy (NVP) affects up to 85% of all women during pregnancy, but for the majority self-management suffices. For the remainder, symptoms are more severe and the most severe form of NVP - hyperemesis gravidarum (HG) - affects 0.3-1.0% of pregnant women. There is no widely accepted point at which NVP becomes HG.
OBJECTIVES
This study aimed to determine the relative clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of treatments for NVP and HG.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux (CAB) Abstracts, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, British Nursing Index, Science Citation Index, Social Sciences Citation Index, Scopus, Conference Proceedings Index, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, Health Economic Evaluations Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects were searched from inception to September 2014. References from studies and literature reviews identified were also examined. was hand-searched, as were websites of relevant organisations. Costs came from NHS sources.
REVIEW METHODS
A systematic review of randomised and non-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for effectiveness, and population-based case series for adverse events and fetal outcomes. Treatments: vitamins B6 and B12, ginger, acupressure/acupuncture, hypnotherapy, antiemetics, dopamine antagonists, 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor antagonists, intravenous (i.v.) fluids, corticosteroids, enteral and parenteral feeding or other novel treatment. Two reviewers extracted data and quality assessed studies. Results were narratively synthesised; planned meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity and incomplete reporting. A simple economic evaluation considered the implied values of treatments.
RESULTS
Seventy-three studies (75 reports) met the inclusion criteria. For RCTs, 33 and 11 studies had a low and high risk of bias respectively. For the remainder ( = 20) it was unclear. The non-randomised studies ( = 9) were low quality. There were 33 separate comparators. The most common were acupressure versus placebo ( = 12); steroid versus usual treatment ( = 7); ginger versus placebo ( = 6); ginger versus vitamin B6 ( = 6); and vitamin B6 versus placebo ( = 4). There was evidence that ginger, antihistamines, metoclopramide (mild disease) and vitamin B6 (mild to severe disease) are better than placebo. Diclectin [Duchesnay Inc.; doxylamine succinate (10 mg) plus pyridoxine hydrochloride (10 mg) slow release tablet] is more effective than placebo and ondansetron is more effective at reducing nausea than pyridoxine plus doxylamine. Diclectin before symptoms of NVP begin for women at high risk of severe NVP recurrence reduces risk of moderate/severe NVP compared with taking Diclectin once symptoms begin. Promethazine is as, and ondansetron is more, effective than metoclopramide for severe NVP/HG. I.v. fluids help correct dehydration and improve symptoms. Dextrose saline may be more effective at reducing nausea than normal saline. Transdermal clonidine patches may be effective for severe HG. Enteral feeding is effective but extreme method treatment for very severe symptoms. Day case management for moderate/severe symptoms is feasible, acceptable and as effective as inpatient care. For all other interventions and comparisons, evidence is unclear. The economic analysis was limited by lack of effectiveness data, but comparison of costs between treatments highlights the implications of different choices.
LIMITATIONS
The main limitations were the quantity and quality of the data available.
CONCLUSION
There was evidence of some improvement in symptoms for some treatments, but these data may not be transferable across disease severities. Methodologically sound and larger trials of the main therapies considered within the UK NHS are needed.
STUDY REGISTRATION
This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013006642.
FUNDING
The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
Topics: Antiemetics; Clinical Trials as Topic; Complementary Therapies; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Female; Fluid Therapy; Humans; Hyperemesis Gravidarum; Nausea; Pregnancy
PubMed: 27731292
DOI: 10.3310/hta20740 -
Psychiatria Polska 2016BPSD (Behavioral and Psychological Symptoms in Dementia) affects virtually all patients with dementia. The aim of this review is to present information on epidemiology,... (Review)
Review
BPSD (Behavioral and Psychological Symptoms in Dementia) affects virtually all patients with dementia. The aim of this review is to present information on epidemiology, consequences and evidence-based non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatment approaches. The review also covers recent literature derived from a systematic literature Medline search on BPSD. Results indicate that BPSD are major risk factors for an earlier placement of affected individuals in nursing homes and a potentially more severe course of dementia over time. Treatment of BPSD is complex and includes both strategies.
Topics: Aggression; Anticonvulsants; Antipsychotic Agents; Behavioral Symptoms; Clinical Protocols; Conduct Disorder; Dementia; Dopamine Antagonists; Female; Geriatric Psychiatry; Humans; Male; Neurocognitive Disorders; Severity of Illness Index
PubMed: 27847922
DOI: 10.12740/PP/64477 -
Gastroenterology Apr 2023Although there have been multiple drugs tested in gastroparesis, their relative efficacy and safety are unknown. We evaluated this in a network meta-analysis of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND & AIMS
Although there have been multiple drugs tested in gastroparesis, their relative efficacy and safety are unknown. We evaluated this in a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
METHODS
We searched the literature to September 7, 2022. We judged the efficacy of drugs based on global symptoms of gastroparesis; individual symptoms, including nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, bloating, or fullness; and safety according to total adverse events and adverse events leading to withdrawal. We extracted data as intention-to-treat analyses, assuming dropouts to be treatment failures and reporting pooled relative risks (RRs) of not improving with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), ranking drugs according to P-score.
RESULTS
We identified 29 RCTs (3772 patients). Based on global symptoms, clebopride ranked first for efficacy (RR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.16-0.57; P-score = .99) followed by domperidone (RR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.48-0.98; P-score = .76). No other drug was superior to placebo. Only 2 drug classes were efficacious: in rank order, oral dopamine antagonists (RR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44-0.77; P-score = .96) and tachykinin-1 antagonists (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.52-0.93; P-score = .83). For individual symptoms, oral metoclopramide ranked first for nausea (RR 0.46; 95% CI, 0.21-1.00; P-score = .95), fullness (RR 0.67; 95% CI, 0.35-1.28; P-score = .86), and bloating (RR 0.53; 95% CI, 0.30-0.93; P-score = .97), based on only 1 small trial. Only prucalopride was more likely to be associated with adverse events than placebo.
CONCLUSIONS
In a network meta-analysis, oral dopamine antagonists and tachykinin-1 antagonists were more efficacious than placebo for gastroparesis, but confidence in the evidence was low to moderate for most comparisons. There is an unmet need for efficacious therapies for gastroparesis.
Topics: Humans; Gastroparesis; Network Meta-Analysis; Nausea; Dopamine Antagonists; Tachykinins
PubMed: 36581089
DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2022.12.014 -
The Journal of Emergency Medicine Oct 2017Chlorpromazine is the only drug approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of hiccups; however, many other pharmacologic treatments have been... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Chlorpromazine is the only drug approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of hiccups; however, many other pharmacologic treatments have been proposed for intractable and persistent hiccups. Currently, there is little evidence to support the use of one agent over another.
OBJECTIVE
This review aims to identify literature concerning the use of pharmacologic treatments for intractable and persistent hiccups with the goal of evaluating therapies in terms of their level of evidence, mechanism of action, efficacy, dosing, onset of action, and adverse effects.
METHODS
A systematic literature search of PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the New York Academy of Medicine was performed to find articles where a pharmacologic agent was used to treat intractable or persistent hiccups between the years 1966 and 2016. The GRADE method was used to assess the level of evidence for the studies included in this review.
RESULTS
This review identified 26 articles involving 10 pharmacologic treatment options that met our inclusion criteria. Amitriptyline, baclofen, gabapentin, haloperidol, metoclopramide, midazolam, nifedipine, nimodipine, orphenadrine, and valproic acid were found in the literature to be successful in treating hiccups.
CONCLUSION
Baclofen, gabapentin, and metoclopramide were the only agents that were studied in a prospective manner, while only baclofen and metoclopramide were studied in randomized controlled trials. No specific recommendations can be made for treating intractable and persistent hiccups with the evidence currently available in the literature. Therapy selection should be specific to individual patients, their underlying comorbidities, etiology of hiccups, and take into account the individual properties of the drugs.
Topics: Adrenergic Uptake Inhibitors; Chlorpromazine; Dopamine Antagonists; Dopamine D2 Receptor Antagonists; Emergency Service, Hospital; GABA-B Receptor Agonists; Hiccup; Humans
PubMed: 29079070
DOI: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2017.05.033 -
General Hospital Psychiatry 2020Though not approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration, intravenous haloperidol (IVH) is widely used off-label to manage agitation and psychosis in... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Though not approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration, intravenous haloperidol (IVH) is widely used off-label to manage agitation and psychosis in patients with delirium in the hospital setting. Over the years, concerns have emerged regarding side effects of IVH, particularly its potential to cause QT prolongation, torsades de pointes (TdP), extrapyramidal symptoms and catatonia.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review of literature of published literature related to side effects of IVH in PubMed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines.
RESULTS
77 of 196 identified manuscripts met inclusion criteria, including 34 clinical trials and 34 case reports or series.
DISCUSSION
Extrapyramidal symptoms, catatonia and neuroleptic malignant syndrome appears to be relatively rare with IVH. In most prospective studies, IVH did not cause greater QT prolongation than placebo, and rates of TdP with IVH appear to be low. There is not clear evidence to suggest that IVH carries greater risk for QT prolongation or TdP than other antipsychotics.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the available literature, we provide modified evidence-based monitoring recommendations for clinicians prescribing IVH in hospital settings. Specifically, we recommend electrocardiogram monitoring only when using doses >5 mg of IVH and telemetry only for high-risk patients receiving cumulative doses of at least 100 mg or with accurately corrected QTc >500 ms.
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Electrocardiography; Haloperidol; Humans; Long QT Syndrome; Prospective Studies; Torsades de Pointes
PubMed: 32979582
DOI: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2020.08.008 -
Psychological Medicine Sep 2022Pharmacological treatment of major depressive disorder is often inefficient, and multiple strategies are used for inadequate response to antidepressants.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Pharmacological treatment of major depressive disorder is often inefficient, and multiple strategies are used for inadequate response to antidepressants. Second-generation antipsychotics are used as augmentation measures in clinical practice; evidence of their efficacy and acceptability is insufficient, and it remains confusing as to which drug should be selected first. In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we included randomised controlled trials of second-generation antipsychotics used as adjunctive treatment in patients with suboptimal responses. Outcome measures were efficacy (response and remission) and acceptability (dropout due to any reason and adverse events). Thirty-three trials comprising 10 602 participants were included. Regarding efficacy, response rates indicated that all antipsychotics except for ziprasidone were more efficacious than the placebo, with the odds ratios (ORs) ranging from 1.34 for olanzapine and cariprazine [95% credible interval (CrI) 1.04-1.73 and 1.07-1.67, respectively] to 2.17 for risperidone (95% CrI 1.38-3.42). When considering remission, cariprazine was not effective (OR 1.21, 95% CrI 0.96-1.54). For acceptability, quetiapine (OR 0.68, 95% CrI 0.50-0.91), brexpiprazole (OR 0.69, 95% CrI 0.55-0.86), and cariprazine (OR 0.61, 95% CrI 0.46-0.82) were worse than the placebo. With regards to tolerability, only olanzapine (OR 0.51, 95% CrI 0.25-1.07) and risperidone (OR 0.48, 95% CrI 0.10-2.21) showed no significant differences compared with placebo. The administration of adjunctive antipsychotics is associated with high effectiveness and low acceptability. Risperidone and aripiprazole are more efficacious and accepted than other atypical antipsychotics.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Antipsychotic Agents; Aripiprazole; Depressive Disorder, Major; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Olanzapine; Quetiapine Fumarate; Risperidone
PubMed: 35993319
DOI: 10.1017/S0033291722001246 -
Journal of Psychopharmacology (Oxford,... Mar 2023Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a highly burdensome health condition, for which there are numerous accepted pharmacological and psychological interventions.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a highly burdensome health condition, for which there are numerous accepted pharmacological and psychological interventions. Adjunctive treatment (augmentation/combination) is recommended for the ~50% of MDD patients who do not adequately respond to first-line treatment. We aimed to evaluate the current evidence for concomitant approaches for people with early-stage treatment-resistant depression (TRD; defined below).
METHODS
We systematically searched Medline and Institute for Scientific Information Web of Science to identify randomised controlled trials of adjunctive treatment of ⩾10 adults with MDD who had not responded to ⩾1 adequate antidepressant. The cochrane risk of bias (RoB) tool was used to assess study quality. Pre-post treatment meta-analyses were performed, allowing for comparison across heterogeneous study designs independent of comparator interventions.
RESULTS
In total, 115 trials investigating 48 treatments were synthesised. The mean intervention duration was 9 weeks (range 5 days to 18 months) with most studies assessed to have low ( = 57) or moderate ( = 51) RoB. The highest effect sizes (ESs) were from cognitive behavioural therapy (ES = 1.58, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.09-2.07), (es)ketamine (ES = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.23-1.73) and risperidone (ES = 1.42, 95% CI: 1.29-1.61). Only aripiprazole and lithium were examined in ⩾10 studies. Pill placebo (ES = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.81-0.98) had a not inconsiderable ES, and only six treatments' 95% CIs did not overlap with pill placebo's (aripiprazole, (es)ketamine, mirtazapine, olanzapine, quetiapine and risperidone). We report marked heterogeneity between studies for almost all analyses.
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings support cautious optimism for several augmentation strategies; although considering the high prevalence of TRD, evidence remains inadequate for each treatment option.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Aripiprazole; Risperidone; Depression; Depressive Disorder, Major; Ketamine
PubMed: 35861202
DOI: 10.1177/02698811221104058 -
Pediatrics Feb 2016Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is increasingly recognized as a public health issue. Irritability and aggression (IA) often negatively affect the lives of people with ASD... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is increasingly recognized as a public health issue. Irritability and aggression (IA) often negatively affect the lives of people with ASD and their families. Although many medications have been tested for IA in ASDs in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), critical quantitative analyses of these trials are lacking in the literature.
OBJECTIVES
To systematically review and quantitatively analyze the efficacy and safety of pharmacologic treatments for IA in youth with ASD.
DATA SOURCES
Studies were identified from Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, and review articles.
METHODS
Original articles on placebo-controlled RCTs of pharmacologic treatments of IA in youth age 2 to 17 years with ASD were included. Data items included study design, study goals, details of study participants, details of intervention, study results, statistical methods, side effects, and risks of bias. The primary study outcome measure was the effect size of reduction in the Aberrant Behavioral Checklist-Irritability (ABC-I) scores in the medication group, as compared with placebo, in RCTs using parallel groups design.
RESULTS
Forty-six RCTs were identified. Compared with placebo, 3 compounds resulted in significant improvement in ABC-I at the end of treatment. Risperidone and aripiprazole were found to be the most effective, with the largest effect sizes. Sedation, extrapyramidal sides effects, and weight gain were assessed quantitatively.
CONCLUSIONS
Although risperidone and aripiprazole have the strongest evidence in reducing ABC-I in youth with ASD, a few other compounds also showed significant efficacy with fewer potential side effects and adverse reactions in single studies.
Topics: Adolescent; Antipsychotic Agents; Aripiprazole; Autism Spectrum Disorder; Child; Child Development Disorders, Pervasive; Child, Preschool; Humans; Irritable Mood; Problem Behavior; Risperidone; Self-Injurious Behavior
PubMed: 26908468
DOI: 10.1542/peds.2015-2851K -
Critical Care (London, England) Aug 2016Intolerance to enteral nutrition is common in critically ill adults, and may result in significant morbidity including ileus, abdominal distension, vomiting and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Intolerance to enteral nutrition is common in critically ill adults, and may result in significant morbidity including ileus, abdominal distension, vomiting and potential aspiration events. Prokinetic agents are prescribed to improve gastric emptying. However, the efficacy and safety of these agents in critically ill patients is not well-defined. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the efficacy and safety of prokinetic agents in critically ill patients.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library from inception up to January 2016. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of critically ill adults assigned to receive a prokinetic agent or placebo, and that reported relevant clinical outcomes. Two independent reviewers screened potentially eligible articles, selected eligible studies, and abstracted pertinent data. We calculated pooled relative risk (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference for continuous outcomes, with the corresponding 95 % confidence interval (CI). We assessed risk of bias using Cochrane risk of bias tool, and the quality of evidence using grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) methodology.
RESULTS
Thirteen RCTs (enrolling 1341 patients) met our inclusion criteria. Prokinetic agents significantly reduced feeding intolerance (RR 0.73, 95 % CI 0.55, 0.97; P = 0.03; moderate certainty), which translated to 17.3 % (95 % CI 5, 26.8 %) absolute reduction in feeding intolerance. Prokinetics also reduced the risk of developing high gastric residual volumes (RR 0.69; 95 % CI 0.52, 0.91; P = 0.009; moderate quality) and increased the success of post-pyloric feeding tube placement (RR 1.60, 95 % CI 1.17, 2.21; P = 0.004; moderate quality). There was no significant improvement in the risk of vomiting, diarrhea, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay or mortality. Prokinetic agents also did not significantly increase the rate of diarrhea.
CONCLUSION
There is moderate-quality evidence that prokinetic agents reduce feeding intolerance in critically ill patients compared to placebo or no intervention. However, the impact on other clinical outcomes such as pneumonia, mortality, and ICU length of stay is unclear.
Topics: Chi-Square Distribution; Critical Illness; Diarrhea; Domperidone; Dopamine Antagonists; Enteral Nutrition; Erythromycin; Gastric Emptying; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Length of Stay; Metoclopramide; Residual Volume; Vomiting
PubMed: 27527069
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-016-1441-z