People with mental health problems experience high rates of unemployment. There are various schemes delivering support to people with mental health problems who are trying to find employment. Supported employment tries to place people into competitive jobs. People are placed quickly in normal work settings where they receive intensive support and training from ‘job coaches’.
Individual placement and support (IPS) is a more specified scheme that includes: finding local jobs; a rapid job search; customer choice in what they want from the employment service; close working between employment and mental health teams; attention to people’s preferred job, their strengths and work experience; ongoing and, if necessary, long-term individual support; and the benefits of counselling. Employment specialists act to identify people’s job interests, assist with job finding, give job support and engage other support services. IPS uses assertive outreach to deliver training, advice and vocational support in the community. Augmented supported employment is where employment support is given with other supplementary techniques, such as social skills training, motivational classes and various types of rehabilitation. Other approaches are many and varied, including: job workshops; job counselling; peer support; partnerships with business; and the Clubhouse model, which involves training, work experience, peer support and transitional employment and IPS because they do not search for immediate and competitive employment. However, all approaches involve periods of preparation, education and on-the-job training.
This review compares supported employment and IPS with other approaches for finding employment. Drawing from a total of 2259 people with mental health problems in 14 studies, the review has two main findings: 1) Supported employment increases the length and time of people’s employment; 2) People on supported employment find jobs quicker. Supported employment and IPS are better than other approaches in these two respects, but there is limited information or measurable differences on other important issues for service users.
For example, there is little information on issues such as improving quality of life, impact on people’s mental health, days in hospital and costs. Furthermore, the review built its main findings on limited statistical evidence drawn mainly from studies carried out in North America and Europe. Future studies should address a fuller range of information and outcomes. Longer studies are needed to see how long the effects of supported employment last.
Monday, 27 January 2014
Tuesday, 7 January 2014
Anticholinergic medication for excessive salivation caused by use of antipsychotics other than clozapine
The first line of treatment of schizophrenia is usually antipsychotic drugs. These drugs help in the treatment of the ‘positive symptoms’ of schizophrenia, such as hearing voices, seeing things and having strange beliefs. However, these drugs often have serious side effects, such as weight gain, muscle stiffness, tiredness, apathy and lack of drive. Dribbling or drooling (hypersalivation) is another common side effect, which frequently occurs at night when asleep. This can be an embarrassing and stigmatising problem that can affect quality of life and cause people to stop their medication, which may result in relapse and going back into hospital. Dribbling and drooling can be difficult to treat; however, anticholinergic drugs can decrease production of saliva and dribbling. This review assessed the evidence for the benefit or harm of anticholinergic drugs used in treating hypersalivation caused by antipsychotic or neuroleptic medication. The review excluded the antipsychotic clozapine, as its role in causing hypersalivation has been the subject of another Cochrane review.
The search was carried out 15 November 2012 and resulted in identification of four potential studies, but none could be included. Three of these were excluded because they involved clozapine-related hypersalivation. The fourth study was excluded because it involved people with mood or other mental disorders and Chinese medicines. Dribbling or hypersalivation is an important problem that needs to be investigated via well-designed research and randomised trials. Until such time, psychiatrists and patients are likely to continue their treatment of hypersalivation on the basis of daily clinical judgement and personal experience rather than hard evidence. Treatment of hypersalivation caused by antipsychotics or neuroleptics other than clozapine does not seem to have received adequate research attention to help guide practice. The review authors conclude that using anticholinergics to treat dribbling or hypersalivation caused by antipsychotic drugs other than clozapine cannot be justified without further study.
The search was carried out 15 November 2012 and resulted in identification of four potential studies, but none could be included. Three of these were excluded because they involved clozapine-related hypersalivation. The fourth study was excluded because it involved people with mood or other mental disorders and Chinese medicines. Dribbling or hypersalivation is an important problem that needs to be investigated via well-designed research and randomised trials. Until such time, psychiatrists and patients are likely to continue their treatment of hypersalivation on the basis of daily clinical judgement and personal experience rather than hard evidence. Treatment of hypersalivation caused by antipsychotics or neuroleptics other than clozapine does not seem to have received adequate research attention to help guide practice. The review authors conclude that using anticholinergics to treat dribbling or hypersalivation caused by antipsychotic drugs other than clozapine cannot be justified without further study.
Friday, 6 December 2013
Quetiapine versus other atypical antipsychotic drugs for schizophrenia
Quetiapine is a second‐generation antipsychotic. Second‐generation or atypical antipsychotic drugs have become the mainstay of treatment in many countries for people with schizophrenia. They are called second‐generation drugs because they are newer than the older drugs, known as typical antipsychotics. Second‐generation drugs are thought to be better than the older drugs in reducing the symptoms of schizophrenia, such as hearing voices and seeing things, and are suggested to produce fewer side effects, such as sleepiness, weight gain, tremors and shaking. However, it is not clear how the various second‐ generation antipsychotic drugs differ from one other. The aim of this review therefore was to evaluate the effects of quetiapine compared with other second‐generation antipsychotic drugs for people with schizophrenia. The review included a total of 35 studies with 5971 people, which provided information on six comparisons (quetiapine vs the following: clozapine, olanzapine, risperidone, ziprasidone, paliperidone and aripiprazole). Comparisons with amisulpride, sertindole and zotepine do not exist, so more research is needed. A major limitation of all findings was the large number of people leaving studies and stopping quetiapine treatment (50.2% of people). The most important finding to note is that if a group is started on quetiapine, most will be off this drug within a few weeks (although the reasons for stopping quetiapine treatment are not covered by the review and so remain uncertain). Quetiapine may be slightly less effective than risperidone and olanzapine in reducing symptoms, and it may cause less weight gain and fewer side effects and associated problems (such as heart problems and diabetes) than olanzapine and paliperidone, but more than are seen with risperidone and ziprasidone. The limited information tends to suggest that people taking quetiapine may need to be hospitalised more frequently than those taking risperidone or olanzapine. This may lead to higher costs in some settings, but the information is not robust enough to guide managers.
Psychosocial interventions for people with both severe mental illness and substance misuse
‘Dual diagnosis’ is the term used to describe people who have a mental health problem and also have problems with drugs or alcohol. In some areas, over 50% of all those with mental health difficulties will have problems with drugs or alcohol. For people with mental illness, substance misuse often has a negative and damaging effect on the symptoms of their illness and the way their medication works. They may become aggressive or engage in activities that are illegal. Substance misuse can also increase risk of suicide, hepatitis C, HIV, relapse, incarceration and homelessness.
People who have substance misuse problems but no mental illness can be treated via a variety of psychosocial interventions. These include motivational interviewing, or MI, that looks at people’s motivation for change; cognitive behavioural therapy, or CBT, which helps people adapt their behaviour by improving coping strategies; a supportive approach similar to that pioneered by Alcoholics Anonymous; family psycho‐education observing the signs and effects of substance misuse; and group or individual skills training. However, using these interventions for people with dual diagnosis is more complex.
The aim of this review was to assess the effects of psychosocial interventions for substance reduction in people with a serious mental illness compared to care as usual or standard care. A search for studies was carried out in July 2012; 32 studies were included in the review with a total of 3165 people. These studies used a variety of different psychosocial interventions (including CBT, MI, skills training, integrated models of care). In the main, evidence was graded as low or very low quality and no study showed any great difference between psychosocial interventions and treatment as usual. There was no compelling evidence to support any one psychosocial treatment over another. However, differences in study designs made comparisons between studies problematic. Studies also had high numbers of people leaving early, differences in outcomes measured, and differing ways in which the psychosocial interventions were delivered. More large scale, high quality and better reported studies are required to address these shortcomings. This will better address whether psychosocial interventions are effective and good for people with mental illness and substance misuse problems.
People who have substance misuse problems but no mental illness can be treated via a variety of psychosocial interventions. These include motivational interviewing, or MI, that looks at people’s motivation for change; cognitive behavioural therapy, or CBT, which helps people adapt their behaviour by improving coping strategies; a supportive approach similar to that pioneered by Alcoholics Anonymous; family psycho‐education observing the signs and effects of substance misuse; and group or individual skills training. However, using these interventions for people with dual diagnosis is more complex.
The aim of this review was to assess the effects of psychosocial interventions for substance reduction in people with a serious mental illness compared to care as usual or standard care. A search for studies was carried out in July 2012; 32 studies were included in the review with a total of 3165 people. These studies used a variety of different psychosocial interventions (including CBT, MI, skills training, integrated models of care). In the main, evidence was graded as low or very low quality and no study showed any great difference between psychosocial interventions and treatment as usual. There was no compelling evidence to support any one psychosocial treatment over another. However, differences in study designs made comparisons between studies problematic. Studies also had high numbers of people leaving early, differences in outcomes measured, and differing ways in which the psychosocial interventions were delivered. More large scale, high quality and better reported studies are required to address these shortcomings. This will better address whether psychosocial interventions are effective and good for people with mental illness and substance misuse problems.
Pimozide for schizophrenia or related psychoses
People with schizophrenia have ‘positive symptoms’ such as hearing voices and seeing things (hallucinations) and fixed strange beliefs (delusions). People with schizophrenia also have ‘negative symptoms’ such as tiredness, apathy and loss of emotion. Antipsychotic drugs are the main treatment for the symptoms of schizophrenia and can be grouped into older drugs (first generation or ‘typical’) and newer drugs (second generation or ‘atypical’). Pimozide is a ‘typical’ antipsychotic drug that was first introduced in the late 1960s and was given to people with schizophrenia. Pimozide is thought to be effective in treating the positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia or similar mental health problems such as delusional disorder, but it produces serious side effects such as muscle stiffness, tremors and slow body movements. Pimozide may also cause heart problems and has been linked to sudden unexplained death. Monitoring the heart via electrocardiogram is now required before and during treatment with pimozide. It is well known that people with mental health problems suffer from physical illnesses such as heart disease and diabetes and can die on average twenty years younger than those in the general population.
An update search for this review was carried out 28 January 2013; the review now includes 32 studies that assess the effects of pimozide for people with schizophrenia or similar mental health problems. Pimozide was compared with other antipsychotic drugs, placebo (‘dummy’ treatment) or no treatment. Results suggest that pimozide is probably just as effective as other commonly used ‘typical’ antipsychotic drugs (for outcomes such as treating mental state, relapse, leaving the study early). No studies included delusional disorders, so no information is available on this group of people. No evidence was found to support the concern that pimozide causes heart problems (although this may be result of the fact that the studies were small and short term and the participants did not receive doses above recommended limits of 20 mg/d). Pimozide may cause less sleepiness than other typical antipsychotic drugs, but it may cause more tremors and uncontrollable shaking. The claim that pimozide is useful for treating people with negative symptoms also is not supported and proven. However, the quality of evidence in the main was low or very low quality, studies were small and of short duration and were poorly reported. Large‐scale, well‐conducted and well‐reported studies are required to assess the effectiveness of pimozide in the treatment of schizophrenia and other mental health problems such as delusional disorder.
An update search for this review was carried out 28 January 2013; the review now includes 32 studies that assess the effects of pimozide for people with schizophrenia or similar mental health problems. Pimozide was compared with other antipsychotic drugs, placebo (‘dummy’ treatment) or no treatment. Results suggest that pimozide is probably just as effective as other commonly used ‘typical’ antipsychotic drugs (for outcomes such as treating mental state, relapse, leaving the study early). No studies included delusional disorders, so no information is available on this group of people. No evidence was found to support the concern that pimozide causes heart problems (although this may be result of the fact that the studies were small and short term and the participants did not receive doses above recommended limits of 20 mg/d). Pimozide may cause less sleepiness than other typical antipsychotic drugs, but it may cause more tremors and uncontrollable shaking. The claim that pimozide is useful for treating people with negative symptoms also is not supported and proven. However, the quality of evidence in the main was low or very low quality, studies were small and of short duration and were poorly reported. Large‐scale, well‐conducted and well‐reported studies are required to assess the effectiveness of pimozide in the treatment of schizophrenia and other mental health problems such as delusional disorder.
Haloperidol versus placebo for schizophrenia
Haloperidol was first developed in the late 1950s. Research subsequently showed its therapeutic effects on the symptoms of schizophrenia, such as hearing voices and seeing things (hallucinations), having strange beliefs (delusions), aggressiveness, impulsiveness and states of excitement. This led to the introduction of haloperidol as one of the first antipsychotic drugs. Antipsychotic drugs are the main treatment for the symptoms of schizophrenia. Despite the introduction of newer antipsychotic drugs (second generation or ‘atypical’ drugs), haloperidol remains in widespread use and is the benchmark for judging the effectiveness of newer antipsychotic drugs.
The aim of this review was to evaluate the effects of haloperidol for schizophrenia and other similar serious mental illnesses compared with ‘dummy’ or no treatment (placebo). A new search for trials was carried out in May 2012 and the review now includes 25 studies with a total of 4651 people. Review authors rated the quality of evidence reported in the trials for seven main outcomes (global state, death, discharge from hospital, relapse, leaving the study early, adverse effects and satisfaction with treatment). For global state, leaving the study early and adverse effects the reviewers rated the evidence as moderate quality, however, relapse and discharge from hospital were rated to be very low quality evidence. There were no data available for death and satisfaction with treatment.
Based on moderate quality evidence, haloperidol was found to be better than placebo in treating schizophrenia. More people given haloperidol improved in the first six weeks of treatment than those given placebo. However, a significant number of people on haloperidol suffered from side effects, including muscle stiffness, uncontrollable shaking, tremors, sleepiness and restlessness.
Authors concluded that haloperidol is a potent and effective antipsychotic for treating the symptoms of schizophrenia but has the potential to cause debilitating side effects. People with schizophrenia and psychiatrists may wish to prescribe a newer antipsychotic drug with fewer side effects.
Finally, a large proportion of other information and data in the trials were poor and badly reported, meaning that better studies are required. Many people, from both groups left the trials early. This suggests that the design and running of the trials was poor and perhaps not acceptable to people. In light of these findings, it is perhaps surprising that haloperidol is a benchmark antipsychotic in widespread use for treating schizophrenia. It is also surprising that haloperidol is widely used as a comparison for new medication. Haloperidol is an effective antipsychotic drug but has serious and debilitating side effects.
The aim of this review was to evaluate the effects of haloperidol for schizophrenia and other similar serious mental illnesses compared with ‘dummy’ or no treatment (placebo). A new search for trials was carried out in May 2012 and the review now includes 25 studies with a total of 4651 people. Review authors rated the quality of evidence reported in the trials for seven main outcomes (global state, death, discharge from hospital, relapse, leaving the study early, adverse effects and satisfaction with treatment). For global state, leaving the study early and adverse effects the reviewers rated the evidence as moderate quality, however, relapse and discharge from hospital were rated to be very low quality evidence. There were no data available for death and satisfaction with treatment.
Based on moderate quality evidence, haloperidol was found to be better than placebo in treating schizophrenia. More people given haloperidol improved in the first six weeks of treatment than those given placebo. However, a significant number of people on haloperidol suffered from side effects, including muscle stiffness, uncontrollable shaking, tremors, sleepiness and restlessness.
Authors concluded that haloperidol is a potent and effective antipsychotic for treating the symptoms of schizophrenia but has the potential to cause debilitating side effects. People with schizophrenia and psychiatrists may wish to prescribe a newer antipsychotic drug with fewer side effects.
Finally, a large proportion of other information and data in the trials were poor and badly reported, meaning that better studies are required. Many people, from both groups left the trials early. This suggests that the design and running of the trials was poor and perhaps not acceptable to people. In light of these findings, it is perhaps surprising that haloperidol is a benchmark antipsychotic in widespread use for treating schizophrenia. It is also surprising that haloperidol is widely used as a comparison for new medication. Haloperidol is an effective antipsychotic drug but has serious and debilitating side effects.
Dance therapy for schizophrenia.
The first line of treatment of schizophrenia is usually antipsychotic drugs. Usually, these drugs are more effective in treating the 'positive symptoms' than 'negative symptoms' of schizophrenia. Moreover, antipsychotic drugs have debilitating side‐effects such as weight gain, shaking, tremors and muscle stiffness.
Dance therapy (also known as dance movement therapy, DMT) uses movement and dance to explore a person’s emotions in a non‐verbal way (without language or words). The therapist helps the individual to interpret their dance and movement and link them with people’s personal feelings. Dance has been used as a healing ritual since earliest human history, but the establishment of dance therapy as a profession is quite recent. Dance therapy can be used with people of all ages, races and genders. It can be effective in the treatment of people with medical, social, developmental, physical and psychological impairments. The review included one study with 45 participants. The aim was to compare dance therapy with standard care or other interventions. The one included study compared dance therapy plus routine care with routine care alone. In the main, there was no difference between those who engaged in dance therapy versus those who did not (for outcomes such as satisfaction with care, mental state, leaving the study early, quality of life). However, those who engaged in dance therapy showed significant improvement in negative symptoms.
Overall, because of the small number of participants, the findings are limited. There is little evidence to support or refute the use of dance therapy. Larger studies and trials are needed that focus on important outcomes (such as rates of relapse, quality of life, admission to hospital, leaving the study early, cost of care and satisfaction with treatment). Further research would help clarify whether dance therapy is an effective and holistic treatment for people with schizophrenia, especially in terms of helping people cope with negative symptoms that do not respond so well to antipsychotic drugs.
Dance therapy (also known as dance movement therapy, DMT) uses movement and dance to explore a person’s emotions in a non‐verbal way (without language or words). The therapist helps the individual to interpret their dance and movement and link them with people’s personal feelings. Dance has been used as a healing ritual since earliest human history, but the establishment of dance therapy as a profession is quite recent. Dance therapy can be used with people of all ages, races and genders. It can be effective in the treatment of people with medical, social, developmental, physical and psychological impairments. The review included one study with 45 participants. The aim was to compare dance therapy with standard care or other interventions. The one included study compared dance therapy plus routine care with routine care alone. In the main, there was no difference between those who engaged in dance therapy versus those who did not (for outcomes such as satisfaction with care, mental state, leaving the study early, quality of life). However, those who engaged in dance therapy showed significant improvement in negative symptoms.
Overall, because of the small number of participants, the findings are limited. There is little evidence to support or refute the use of dance therapy. Larger studies and trials are needed that focus on important outcomes (such as rates of relapse, quality of life, admission to hospital, leaving the study early, cost of care and satisfaction with treatment). Further research would help clarify whether dance therapy is an effective and holistic treatment for people with schizophrenia, especially in terms of helping people cope with negative symptoms that do not respond so well to antipsychotic drugs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)