Search

Introduction: The Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale was initially developed as a rapid method to assess symptom change in psychiatric inpatients of various diagnoses. The original version was expanded to an 18-item version and thereafter to a 24-item version to increase sensitivity to a broader range of psychotic and affective symptoms. The latest version of the expanded 24- item BPRS provides probe questions and detailed anchor points for the ratings for each item., Literature Findings: Studies have shown the expanded and anchored 24-item BPRS to be a sensitive and effective measure of psychiatric symptoms with good interrater reliability that can be maintained over time. To our knowledge, there are eight published papers including factor analyses of the BPRS-E(A). While many similarities are evident between these studies, inconsistencies are apparent that may have been due to sample size, characteristics and / or methodological differences in the factor analysis computation. Among these studies, six provided a four-factor solution. There was no French version of this scale available., Methods: After its translation into French and back translation, we investigated the validity of the French BPRS-E(A) version. We carried out a component analysis on the data of 111 participants of various diagnoses, mostly hospitalised for a first psychotic episode, yielding to a three-factor solution (positive symptoms--disorganisation; depression-anxiety and negative symptoms)., Results: A good internal consistency and interrater reliability were found. These results confirm the psychometric value of the BPRS-E(A) in its French version. We compared those findings to earlier reports; similarities and differences are discussed., (Copyright © 2009 L’Encéphale, Paris. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The commercial introduction of atypical antipsychotics, called second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs), a few years ago, has led to a world-wide reappraisal of the established treatment strategies for people with psychotic or bipolar disorders. They permitted improvements in the pharmacologic management of psychiatric diseases. As compared to conventional neuroleptics or first-generation antipsychotics (FGAs), they promised better efficacy especially on negative symptoms and cognitive impairments of psychiatric diseases and, at the same time, better tolerance on neurological side effects. Now, they have shown other side effects and they have a higher acquisition cost than FGAs., Objectives and Methods: The aim of this paper is to describe and analyse the prescribing practices of antipsychotic drugs in French psychiatric hospitals for adult inpatients and to compare them with other surveys and guidelines. In June 2004, we conducted a one-day, cross-sectional, observational and naturalistic study in 13 hospitals, members of the PIC network., Results: Two thousand one hundred and ninety-two prescriptions with antipsychotic treatment were collected. One thousand one hundred and fifty-four prescriptions (52.6%) included a SGA, but the FGAs were the most prescribed (65.8%; n=2259), principally cyamemazine (24.7%). There was one antipsychotic in 50.7% of prescriptions, two antipsychotics in 42.2%, but the second neuroleptic used was a sedative (82.6%), principally cyamemazine. Multiple antipsychotics were present in 1081 prescriptions (49.3%), with an average number of 1.57 antipsychotics. A mood stabiliser, an antidepressant, an anxiolytic and a hypnotic were coprescribed in respectively 37, 30.5, 65.1 and 41.6%. There were 2.48 psychotropic drugs associated with the principal antipsychotic; in total, with correctors of side-effects of the antipsychotics, there were 3.38 drugs per prescription. The SGAs aimed more often for psychotic (F20-F29) patients (61.9% versus 43.3% with FGAs), who were males (61.4% versus 68%), younger (42.6 years versus 44.1 years; p<0.02), with higher average daily doses, more associated with other neuroleptics (p<0.0004) and less associated with anticholinergic antiparkinsonian agents (p<10(-4)) than FGAs. Compared to other surveys, these results showed that the SGAs have become the first-line treatment for psychiatric disorders. The highest average daily doses corresponded to treatments of psychotic patients and, hence, the values might largely exceed the authorized maximum doses. Furthermore, in more than half of the cases, an FGA, generally a sedative, was associated with an SGA that did not comply with the principle of monotherapy established by the national and international guidelines; that also annulled the expected benefit of the SGAs on the awakening, cognition and the neurological tolerability of the treatment. The coprescriptions of the other psychotropic drugs to neuroleptics also remained the rule in psychiatry, showing all the complexity of pharmacological psychiatric medications. Prescriptions also included treatments for side effects of antipsychotics; even on the prescriptions including the SGAs, there was the coprescription of anticholinergic antiparkinsonian drugs, the deleterious character of which one knows on cognition. This resulted in a difficulty of understanding the prescription for the patient, associated with reduced compliance and increased risks of pharmacological side effects. The heterogeneity of the situations of crisis in psychiatric hospitals could make the strict application of guidelines' recommendations difficult. Nevertheless, the educational interventions in psychopharmacology for patients and the training campaigns for psychiatrists and nurses are necessary to improve the therapeutic management of the patient and ensure him/her optimal quality of life., Conclusion: This kind of survey, far too rare, was very important because it showed the routine clinical settings in which these new drugs were really used. The results showed that SGAs appeared to take the place of the FGAs used in the treatment of psychoses, particularly schizophrenia, but also in the treatment of mood disorders and they reflected actual clinical practices. Other surveys must be conducted to see whether our study confirms the general trend concerning the use of these drugs and, therefore, to reassess these prescribing practices.

Background: An increasing interest in the study of cognition in Schizophrenia has developed within the last few years although cognitive problems have been described in this disorder since the beginning of the 20th century. Presently, various data tend to assert that cognitive disorders are the core disturbance in schizophrenia and that their severity is predictive of the course of the disease. Indeed, studies have shown that the disturbances measured in cognitive tests are neither the consequences of positive or negative symptoms, nor related to motivation or global intellectual deficit, nor to anti-psychotic medication. It is also presently known that the severity of cognitive symptoms is a better indicator of social and functional outcome than the severity of the negative or positive symptoms. The patients who have the most severe cognitive deficits during the first episode of the disease are most likely to present a chronic and severe form later on. The aspects of cognition that are specifically impaired in schizophrenia are verbal memory, working memory, motor function, attention, executive functions, and verbal fluency. Cognitive disturbances are thus very important in several fields of research in schizophrenia such as: understanding the psychopathology, epidemiology (indicators of vulnerability), genetics (endophenotypes), neuro-imaging (including functional neuro-imaging), and psychopharmacology (they can be used as a parameter of evaluation in therapeutic trials with new molecules, or cognitive psychotherapy). LIMITS OF COGNITION ASSESSMENTS: However, there are some methodological limits to these cognitive evaluations. First, schizophrenia is a heterogeneous disease and there are no specificities of the different subgroups in terms of cognition. Secondly, the time chosen to evaluate the abilities of the patient is also a limiting factor. But most of all, the batteries of tests used in different studies are not standardized. BRIEF ASSESSMENT OF COGNITION IN SCHIZOPHRENIA: It is therefore of great interest to create an available and easily used battery of validated tests. This would enable one to measure the different cognitive deficits and to repeat the tests, and assess evolution through longitudinal follow up of the patients. The BACS is a new instrument developed by Keefe et al. in the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioural Sciences at the University of Duke Medical Centre. It evaluates the cognitive dimensions specifically altered in schizophrenia and correlated with the evolution of the disease. This test is simple to use, requiring only paper, pencils and a stopwatch. It can be administered by different carers. The duration of the test session is approximately 35min. This battery of tests was validated on a sample of 150 patients compared with a sample of 50 controls, matched for age, parent education and ethnic groups. This aim of this study is to create a French adaptation of the BACS (translation and back translation approved by the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioural Sciences at the University of Duke Medical Centre) and then to test its easiness of administration and its sensitivity, performing correlation analysis between the French Version of the BACS (version A) and a standard battery. Its adaptation and validation in French would at first be useful for the French-speaking areas and then would add some new data for the pertinence of using the BACS., Methods: 35 French stabilized schizophrenic patients were recruited from the inpatient and outpatient facilities at the Clermont-de-L'Oise Mental Health Hospital (Picardie area, France) in Dr Boitard's Psychiatric Department (FJ 5.) Patients were required to meet DSM-IV criteria for schizophrenia or schizoaffective illness. The patients were tested on two separate days by two independent clinicians with less than two weeks between the two assessments. During the first test session, subjects received the French A version of the BACS and during the second session, they were administered the standard battery of cognitive tests including: the Rey Auditory-Verbal learning test, the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, third edition, subtests (Digit inverse sequencing, Digit Symbol-Coding), the Trail-Making A, Verbal Fluency (Controlled Oral Word Association Test, Category Instances), and the Wisconsin Card Sort Test (128 card version). The factor structure of the French BACS A Version was determined by performing a principal components analysis with oblique rotation. The relationship between the French BACS sub-scores and the standard battery sub-scores was determined by calculating Pearson's correlations among the sub-scores, with a level of significance of alpha<0.05., Results: All the 35 patients completed the standard battery and each subtest of the French BACS A Version without interruption and with good understanding of the instructions. The average duration of the BACS test sessions was 36.51min (S.D.=12.14.) compared to the standard battery in which the sessions lasted more than one hour with more difficulty during the Wisconsin tests. The factor analysis conducted on the data collected from patients suggests that there is a single dimension, a factor of general cognitive performance, which accounted for the greatest amount of variance. The BACS thus permits an assessment of overall cognitive function as a global score, more than some individual specific cognitive domains. The sub-scores from the French BACS A Version were strongly correlated with the standard battery corresponding sub-scores. We observed significant correlations for all the subtests evaluating: verbal memory (Pearson=0.83; p<0.001; IC [0.69; 0.91]), working memory (Pearson=0.67; p<0.001; IC[0.43; 0.80]), verbal fluency (semantic: Pearson=0.64; p<0.001; IC[0.40; 0.80]), alphabetical (Pearson=0.87; p<0.001;IC[0.77; 0.93]), attention and speed of information processing (Pearson=0.69; p<0.001; IC[0.47; 0.83]), executive function (Pearson=0.64; p<0.001; IC[0.39; 0.80]). We almost found a significant correlation for motor speed (Pearson=-0. 32; p=0.06; IC [-0.59; -0.014])., Conclusion: The French adaptation of the BACS scale is easier to use in schizophrenic patients with French as mother tongue, with a completion rate equal to 1, and also with less than 35min to complete and check. We obtained significant correlations for all domains except motor speed, which is almost significant. The BACS is as sensitive to cognitive impairment in patients with schizophrenia as a standard battery of tests that required over 2h to complete. Moreover, these results demonstrate that the BACS, the global score of which may be the most powerful indicator of functional outcome, can also be a good neuropsychological instrument for assessing global cognition in patients with schizophrenia.

Unlabelled: The commercial introduction of atypical antipsychotics (AAP) constitutes a considerable step forward in the sense that it has led to a world-wide reappraisal of the established treatment strategies for people with psychoses (including schizophrenia and affective psychoses). They have allowed refinements in the pharmacologic management of psychoses but they have a higher acquisition cost than conventional neuroleptics. The cost of the newer AAP had a substantial effect on medical resources: the AAP account for only 43.2% of neuroleptic prescriptions, but 76.1% of medical costs associated with neuroleptic drugs, and in terms of treatment costs, a reduction (50%) was found with risperidone compared with olanzapine for a same number of treated patients. The aim of this paper was to examine the use of these drugs, to compare them and to assess their impact within the context of psychiatric hospital practice, by means of analysis of prescribing practices for amisulpride, clozapine, olanzapine and risperidone for all treated patients. We conducted an observational, naturalistic study at Charles Perrens psychiatric Hospital in Bordeaux (France) that reproduced the clinical conditions in which these new drugs are used. Four photographies of all the medical prescriptions concerning atypical antipsychotic drugs were done between October 1999 (four months after the introduction in France of the olanzapine, the last of the new antipsychotics) and June 2001 (n=682 prescriptions). The total amount of these prescriptions corresponded to 527 patients. Treatment groups were compared - first overall and after by considering 2 groups: psychotic and non-psychotic patients - through descriptive analyses of sociodemographic characteristics of patients, diagnosis, percentages of patients receiving concomitant psychotropic medication and/or receiving treatment-emergent side effects and mean dosages of AAP therapy according to concomitant medication. In the same way, we compared the four AAP through their prescribing practices'evolution during the four survey., Results: AAP drugs account for 43.2% of prescriptions (and conventional neuroleptics 56.8% of them). We recorded a significant increase between the four surveys (p<0.02): 36.6% at the beginning to 47.8% at the end of the study. From the 682 collected prescriptions, 72 (10.6%) included clozapine, 130 (19.1%) amisulpride, 229 (33.6%) olanzapine and 251 (36.8%) risperidone. Sixty five percent of AAP prescriptions involved psychotic patients. A relative stability in characteristics of AAP prescriptions during the four surveys was found. So, no significant differences were observed between amisulpride, olanzapine, risperidone, in terms of age, sex, sociodemographic characteristics, unlike clozapine. However, there were statistical differences between all the AAP in the concurrent use of other neuroleptic agents (p<0.02), hypnotic drugs (p<0.006), mood stabilizer drugs (p<0.03), and anticholinergic drugs (p<0.007). Statistically, the mean dosage of amisulpride increased when a mood stabilizer drug was coprescribed (p<0.0007), but it decreased with an antidepressant drug (p<0.004) or an hypnotic drug (p<0.02); clozapine 's one decreased every time an antidepressant drug was coprescribed (p<0.02); with olanzapine, there was a significant increase every time an other neuroleptic agent (p<0.03) or an anticholinergic drug (p<0.006) was associated; then for risperidone, the mean dosage increased with the coprescription of an other neuroleptic agent (p<0.00002), an anticholinergic (p<0.00003) or an adrenolytic drug (p<0.04). The pattern of prescribing practices that emerges from our four surveys suggests that these new AAP are significantly more and more often associated with a stabilizer mood drug (p<0.009) (particularly the olanzapine) or/and an anxiolytic drug (p<0.05) (like the amisulpride in particular). Considering the four AAP globally, but more with the risperidone, the association with a neurovegetative corrector agent decreased (p<0.004) during the four surveys. Then, concerning the psychoticng the four surveys. Then, concerning the psychotic patients, the AAP were significantly more often associated with other neuroleptic agents (p<0.03), the amisulpride in particular, with anticholinergic drugs (p<0.00005), but significantly less with mood stabilizer drugs (p<0.00003) principally the amisulpride and the risperidone, with antidepressant drugs (p<0.02) particularly the risperidone. This kind of survey, however it is too much rare, is very important because it shows the clinical conditions in which these new drugs are really used. The results show that AAP appear to be the replacements of the older neuroleptics used in the treatment of psychoses, including particularly schizophrenia, but also in the treatment of mood disorders, and they reflect actual clinical practices. Other surveys must be achieved to see if our study confirms the general trend concerning the use of these drugs and so as to reassess these prescribing practices.