口服与长效注射抗精神病药物治疗精神分裂症和治疗不依从风险的特殊人群:一项系统综述。

IF 3.6 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Schizophrenia Research and Treatment Pub Date : 2012-01-01 Epub Date: 2012-02-15 DOI:10.1155/2012/407171
Simon Zhornitsky, Emmanuel Stip
{"title":"口服与长效注射抗精神病药物治疗精神分裂症和治疗不依从风险的特殊人群:一项系统综述。","authors":"Simon Zhornitsky,&nbsp;Emmanuel Stip","doi":"10.1155/2012/407171","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) should offer better efficacy and tolerability, compared to oral antipsychotics due to improved adherence and more stable pharmacokinetics. However, data on LAIs has been mixed, with some studies finding that they are more effective and tolerable than oral antipsychotics, and others finding the contrary. One possibility for the disparate results may be that some studies administered different antipsychotics in the oral and injectable form. The present systematic review examined the efficacy and tolerability of LAIs versus their oral equivalents in randomized and naturalistic studies. In addition, it examined the impact of LAIs on special populations such as patients with first-episode psychosis, substance use disorders, and a history of violence or on involuntary outpatient commitment. Randomized studies suggest that not all LAIs are the same; for example, long-acting risperidone may be associated with equal or less side effects than oral risperidone, whereas fluphenazine decanoate and enanthate may be associated with equal or more side effects than oral fluphenazine. They also suggest that LAIs reduce risk of relapse versus oral antipsychotics in schizophrenia outpatients when combined with quality psychosocial interventions. For their part, naturalistic studies point to a larger magnitude of benefit for LAIs, relative to their oral equivalents particularly among first-episode patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":45388,"journal":{"name":"Schizophrenia Research and Treatment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2012/407171","citationCount":"101","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Oral versus Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotics in the Treatment of Schizophrenia and Special Populations at Risk for Treatment Nonadherence: A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Simon Zhornitsky,&nbsp;Emmanuel Stip\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2012/407171\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) should offer better efficacy and tolerability, compared to oral antipsychotics due to improved adherence and more stable pharmacokinetics. However, data on LAIs has been mixed, with some studies finding that they are more effective and tolerable than oral antipsychotics, and others finding the contrary. One possibility for the disparate results may be that some studies administered different antipsychotics in the oral and injectable form. The present systematic review examined the efficacy and tolerability of LAIs versus their oral equivalents in randomized and naturalistic studies. In addition, it examined the impact of LAIs on special populations such as patients with first-episode psychosis, substance use disorders, and a history of violence or on involuntary outpatient commitment. Randomized studies suggest that not all LAIs are the same; for example, long-acting risperidone may be associated with equal or less side effects than oral risperidone, whereas fluphenazine decanoate and enanthate may be associated with equal or more side effects than oral fluphenazine. They also suggest that LAIs reduce risk of relapse versus oral antipsychotics in schizophrenia outpatients when combined with quality psychosocial interventions. For their part, naturalistic studies point to a larger magnitude of benefit for LAIs, relative to their oral equivalents particularly among first-episode patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45388,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Schizophrenia Research and Treatment\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2012/407171\",\"citationCount\":\"101\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Schizophrenia Research and Treatment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/407171\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2012/2/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Schizophrenia Research and Treatment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/407171","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2012/2/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 101

摘要

与口服抗精神病药物相比,长效注射抗精神病药物(LAIs)由于更好的依从性和更稳定的药代动力学,应该具有更好的疗效和耐受性。然而,关于人工智能药物的数据好坏参半,一些研究发现它们比口服抗精神病药物更有效、更耐受性,而另一些研究则发现相反。不同结果的一种可能是,一些研究在口服和注射形式中使用了不同的抗精神病药物。本系统综述在随机和自然研究中比较了LAIs与口服等效物的疗效和耐受性。此外,它还检查了LAIs对特殊人群的影响,如首发精神病患者、物质使用障碍患者、有暴力史患者或非自愿门诊患者。随机研究表明,并非所有lai都是相同的;例如,长效利培酮的副作用可能与口服利培酮相同或更少,而癸酸氟那嗪和烯酸氟那嗪的副作用可能与口服氟那嗪相同或更多。他们还建议,与口服抗精神病药物相比,精神分裂症门诊患者在结合高质量的社会心理干预时,LAIs可降低复发风险。对于他们来说,自然主义的研究指出,相对于口服药物,LAIs的益处更大,尤其是在首发患者中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Oral versus Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotics in the Treatment of Schizophrenia and Special Populations at Risk for Treatment Nonadherence: A Systematic Review.

Long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) should offer better efficacy and tolerability, compared to oral antipsychotics due to improved adherence and more stable pharmacokinetics. However, data on LAIs has been mixed, with some studies finding that they are more effective and tolerable than oral antipsychotics, and others finding the contrary. One possibility for the disparate results may be that some studies administered different antipsychotics in the oral and injectable form. The present systematic review examined the efficacy and tolerability of LAIs versus their oral equivalents in randomized and naturalistic studies. In addition, it examined the impact of LAIs on special populations such as patients with first-episode psychosis, substance use disorders, and a history of violence or on involuntary outpatient commitment. Randomized studies suggest that not all LAIs are the same; for example, long-acting risperidone may be associated with equal or less side effects than oral risperidone, whereas fluphenazine decanoate and enanthate may be associated with equal or more side effects than oral fluphenazine. They also suggest that LAIs reduce risk of relapse versus oral antipsychotics in schizophrenia outpatients when combined with quality psychosocial interventions. For their part, naturalistic studies point to a larger magnitude of benefit for LAIs, relative to their oral equivalents particularly among first-episode patients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: Schizophrenia Research and Treatment is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that publishes original research articles, review articles, and clinical studies related to all aspects of schizophrenia.
期刊最新文献
Adherence to Typical Antipsychotics among Patients with Schizophrenia in Uganda: A Cross-Sectional Study. Investigating Body Mass Index and Body Composition in Patients with Schizophrenia: A Case-Control Study Cigarette Smoking and Schizophrenia: Etiology, Clinical, Pharmacological, and Treatment Implications. Comparison of Efficacy and Safety between Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotic Monotherapy and Combination of Long-Acting Injectable and Oral Antipsychotics in Patients with Schizophrenia. Homocysteine in Schizophrenia: Independent Pathogenetic Factor with Prooxidant Activity or Integral Marker of Other Biochemical Disturbances?
×
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:481959085
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