Is there a relationship between psychiatrist's clinical assessment of medication non-adherence and treatment outcomes? Implications for practice.

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY BMC Psychiatry Pub Date : 2024-12-18 DOI:10.1186/s12888-024-06298-7
Graham Danzer, David Sugarbaker, Adriano Zanello, Sam Barkin, Doug Cort
{"title":"Is there a relationship between psychiatrist's clinical assessment of medication non-adherence and treatment outcomes? Implications for practice.","authors":"Graham Danzer, David Sugarbaker, Adriano Zanello, Sam Barkin, Doug Cort","doi":"10.1186/s12888-024-06298-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is considerable research on the ramifications of medication non-adherence for adults with psychotic illnesses. Much of which has tightly controlled designs and strict inclusion/exclusion procedures (i.e., it is less \"ecologically valid,\" or consistent with real-world challenges in care). The authors sought to determine predictive relationships between psychiatrists' clinical assessments of non-adherence and treatment outcomes, via a design that would be more applicable to practice.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Multiple regression analyses were conducted on non-adherence, symptom severity upon admission, number of recent hospitalizations, and length of hospital stay. The sample consisted of 182 inpatients with psychotic spectrum disorders and significant risk and vulnerability factors. Non-adherence was measured via the psychiatrists' diagnosis of V15.81. Symptom severity was measured via the 24-item Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS-E).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were null findings on non-adherence and BPRS-E pretest score ( <math><mi>χ</mi></math> <sup>2</sup>= 2, p = 0.16), recent hospitalizations ( <math><mi>χ</mi></math> <sup>2</sup>= 1.2, p = 0.27), and length of stay (β = 0.003, p = 0.97). Higher symptom severity predicted a modestly longer length of stay ( <math><mi>χ</mi></math> <sup>2</sup>= .20, p = 0.007), though Bonferroni correction nullified this finding. White/Caucasian participants were far more likely to be non-adherent than black/African-American participants (t = -8.66; p > .00001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Null findings suggest the psychiatrist's initial, quick-form assessment of non-adherence may not necessarily presume a poor prognosis. Perhaps, because individuals with severe and chronic psychotic disorders may have greater coping, adaptive, and survival skills than is often assumed. In severely under-resourced hospitals, such second thoughts and more reliable information about adherence and contributing factors may improve treatment outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":9029,"journal":{"name":"BMC Psychiatry","volume":"24 1","pages":"925"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11656558/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-024-06298-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: There is considerable research on the ramifications of medication non-adherence for adults with psychotic illnesses. Much of which has tightly controlled designs and strict inclusion/exclusion procedures (i.e., it is less "ecologically valid," or consistent with real-world challenges in care). The authors sought to determine predictive relationships between psychiatrists' clinical assessments of non-adherence and treatment outcomes, via a design that would be more applicable to practice.

Method: Multiple regression analyses were conducted on non-adherence, symptom severity upon admission, number of recent hospitalizations, and length of hospital stay. The sample consisted of 182 inpatients with psychotic spectrum disorders and significant risk and vulnerability factors. Non-adherence was measured via the psychiatrists' diagnosis of V15.81. Symptom severity was measured via the 24-item Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS-E).

Results: There were null findings on non-adherence and BPRS-E pretest score ( χ 2= 2, p = 0.16), recent hospitalizations ( χ 2= 1.2, p = 0.27), and length of stay (β = 0.003, p = 0.97). Higher symptom severity predicted a modestly longer length of stay ( χ 2= .20, p = 0.007), though Bonferroni correction nullified this finding. White/Caucasian participants were far more likely to be non-adherent than black/African-American participants (t = -8.66; p > .00001).

Conclusions: Null findings suggest the psychiatrist's initial, quick-form assessment of non-adherence may not necessarily presume a poor prognosis. Perhaps, because individuals with severe and chronic psychotic disorders may have greater coping, adaptive, and survival skills than is often assumed. In severely under-resourced hospitals, such second thoughts and more reliable information about adherence and contributing factors may improve treatment outcomes.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
精神科医生对药物依从性的临床评估与治疗结果之间是否存在关系?对实践的启示。
背景:有相当多的研究对药物依从性对成人精神病患者的影响。其中大部分都有严格控制的设计和严格的纳入/排除程序(即,它的“生态有效性”较低,或与护理中的现实挑战相一致)。作者试图通过一种更适用于实践的设计,确定精神科医生对不依从性的临床评估与治疗结果之间的预测关系。方法:对患者的依从性、入院时症状严重程度、近期住院次数、住院时间进行多元回归分析。样本包括182例具有显著危险和易受伤害因素的精神病谱系障碍住院患者。通过精神科医生的V15.81诊断来测量非依从性。症状严重程度通过24项简短精神病学评定量表(BPRS-E)进行测量。结果:未发现依从性和BPRS-E预试评分(χ 2= 2, p = 0.16)、近期住院(χ 2= 1.2, p = 0.27)和住院时间(β = 0.003, p = 0.97)。症状严重程度越高,住院时间越长(χ 2=。20, p = 0.007),但Bonferroni校正使这一发现无效。白人/白种人参与者比黑人/非裔美国人参与者更有可能不遵守(t = -8.66;p > .00001)。结论:无效的研究结果表明,精神科医生对不依从的初步快速评估不一定会假定预后不良。也许,因为患有严重和慢性精神障碍的个体可能比通常认为的有更好的应对、适应和生存技能。在资源严重不足的医院,这种重新考虑和关于依从性和促成因素的更可靠的信息可能会改善治疗结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Psychiatry
BMC Psychiatry 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
4.50%
发文量
716
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Psychiatry is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of psychiatric disorders, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology.
期刊最新文献
Risk of neuropsychological impairment among therapeutic community residents: relationship with dropout and spontaneous recovery during treatment. The relationship between negative life events and anhedonia among patients with major depressive disorder: chain mediation of insomnia and dysfunctional attitudes. Disruptive behavior in preschoolers: associations with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and parental psychopathology. The interactions of abnormal sleep duration with sleep disturbance and abnormal sleep timing on suicidal ideation. Treatment trajectories of patients with borderline personality disorder prescribed pharmacotherapy: real-world insights from a retrospective observational study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1