氯氮平消费者观点的聚类分析及与其他抗精神病药物消费者的比较。

Schizophrenia Bulletin Open Pub Date : 2021-09-28 eCollection Date: 2021-01-01 DOI:10.1093/schizbullopen/sgab043
Sumeet Sharma, Sarah L Kopelovich, A Umair Janjua, Cristina Pritchett, Beth Broussard, Meena Dhir, Joseph G Wilson, David R Goldsmith, Robert O Cotes
{"title":"氯氮平消费者观点的聚类分析及与其他抗精神病药物消费者的比较。","authors":"Sumeet Sharma,&nbsp;Sarah L Kopelovich,&nbsp;A Umair Janjua,&nbsp;Cristina Pritchett,&nbsp;Beth Broussard,&nbsp;Meena Dhir,&nbsp;Joseph G Wilson,&nbsp;David R Goldsmith,&nbsp;Robert O Cotes","doi":"10.1093/schizbullopen/sgab043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Despite its unique efficacy, clozapine remains underutilized in the United States. Perceptions about clozapine and barriers to its use have been examined among prescribers, but insufficiently studied among consumers. We surveyed 211 antipsychotic consumers (86 on clozapine and 125 on other antipsychotics) on their medication-related perspectives in a public hospital system in Atlanta, Georgia, USA. In contrast to their previous regimen, 72% of clozapine consumers reported they were more satisfied with clozapine. When compared with consumers taking other antipsychotics, clozapine consumers reported more side effects but did not differ on other measures of satisfaction or efficacy. We found Caucasians to be overrepresented among clozapine, as compared to other antipsychotic consumers. Side effects most strongly associated with poor safety ratings were sedation, limb jerking, and dizziness when standing. However, clozapine was only rated less safe by consumers who experienced more than one of these side effects. We used an unsupervised clustering approach to identify three major groups of clozapine consumers. Cluster A (19%) had the lowest safety ratings, aversion to blood work, and a high rate of side effects that associate with lower safety ratings. Cluster B (25%) experienced more hospitalizations and reported satisfaction with clozapine that correlated with efficacy ratings, irrespective of safety ratings. Cluster C (56%) experienced fewer hospitalizations, fewer previous drug trials, greater educational attainment, lower rates of smoking, and rated clozapine more highly. This work identifies common side effects that influence the subjective safety of clozapine and suggests that attitudes toward clozapine depend on context-specific factors.</p>","PeriodicalId":21348,"journal":{"name":"Schizophrenia Bulletin Open","volume":" ","pages":"sgab043"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/f5/55/sgab043.PMC8521287.pdf","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cluster Analysis of Clozapine Consumer Perspectives and Comparison to Consumers on Other Antipsychotics.\",\"authors\":\"Sumeet Sharma,&nbsp;Sarah L Kopelovich,&nbsp;A Umair Janjua,&nbsp;Cristina Pritchett,&nbsp;Beth Broussard,&nbsp;Meena Dhir,&nbsp;Joseph G Wilson,&nbsp;David R Goldsmith,&nbsp;Robert O Cotes\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/schizbullopen/sgab043\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Despite its unique efficacy, clozapine remains underutilized in the United States. Perceptions about clozapine and barriers to its use have been examined among prescribers, but insufficiently studied among consumers. We surveyed 211 antipsychotic consumers (86 on clozapine and 125 on other antipsychotics) on their medication-related perspectives in a public hospital system in Atlanta, Georgia, USA. In contrast to their previous regimen, 72% of clozapine consumers reported they were more satisfied with clozapine. When compared with consumers taking other antipsychotics, clozapine consumers reported more side effects but did not differ on other measures of satisfaction or efficacy. We found Caucasians to be overrepresented among clozapine, as compared to other antipsychotic consumers. Side effects most strongly associated with poor safety ratings were sedation, limb jerking, and dizziness when standing. However, clozapine was only rated less safe by consumers who experienced more than one of these side effects. We used an unsupervised clustering approach to identify three major groups of clozapine consumers. Cluster A (19%) had the lowest safety ratings, aversion to blood work, and a high rate of side effects that associate with lower safety ratings. Cluster B (25%) experienced more hospitalizations and reported satisfaction with clozapine that correlated with efficacy ratings, irrespective of safety ratings. Cluster C (56%) experienced fewer hospitalizations, fewer previous drug trials, greater educational attainment, lower rates of smoking, and rated clozapine more highly. This work identifies common side effects that influence the subjective safety of clozapine and suggests that attitudes toward clozapine depend on context-specific factors.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21348,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Schizophrenia Bulletin Open\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"sgab043\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/f5/55/sgab043.PMC8521287.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Schizophrenia Bulletin Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/schizbullopen/sgab043\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Schizophrenia Bulletin Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/schizbullopen/sgab043","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

尽管氯氮平具有独特的疗效,但在美国仍未充分利用。处方者对氯氮平的认知和使用障碍进行了调查,但对消费者的研究还不够。我们在美国乔治亚州亚特兰大市的一家公立医院系统中调查了211名抗精神病药消费者(氯氮平86名,其他抗精神病药125名)的用药相关观点。与之前的治疗方案相比,72%的氯氮平消费者报告说他们对氯氮平更满意。与服用其他抗精神病药物的消费者相比,氯氮平的消费者报告了更多的副作用,但在其他满意度或疗效方面没有差异。我们发现,与其他抗精神病药物的消费者相比,氯氮平中白人的比例过高。与较差的安全评级最密切相关的副作用是镇静、肢体抽搐和站立时头晕。然而,氯氮平只有在经历了以上一种副作用的消费者才认为不太安全。我们使用无监督聚类方法来确定氯氮平消费者的三个主要群体。A组(19%)的安全性评分最低,对血液检查的厌恶,以及与较低安全性评分相关的高副作用率。B组(25%)经历了更多的住院治疗,并且报告对氯氮平的满意度与疗效评分相关,而与安全性评分无关。C组(56%)住院次数较少,既往药物试验较少,受教育程度较高,吸烟率较低,对氯氮平的评价较高。这项工作确定了影响氯氮平主观安全性的常见副作用,并表明对氯氮平的态度取决于具体环境因素。
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
Cluster Analysis of Clozapine Consumer Perspectives and Comparison to Consumers on Other Antipsychotics.

Despite its unique efficacy, clozapine remains underutilized in the United States. Perceptions about clozapine and barriers to its use have been examined among prescribers, but insufficiently studied among consumers. We surveyed 211 antipsychotic consumers (86 on clozapine and 125 on other antipsychotics) on their medication-related perspectives in a public hospital system in Atlanta, Georgia, USA. In contrast to their previous regimen, 72% of clozapine consumers reported they were more satisfied with clozapine. When compared with consumers taking other antipsychotics, clozapine consumers reported more side effects but did not differ on other measures of satisfaction or efficacy. We found Caucasians to be overrepresented among clozapine, as compared to other antipsychotic consumers. Side effects most strongly associated with poor safety ratings were sedation, limb jerking, and dizziness when standing. However, clozapine was only rated less safe by consumers who experienced more than one of these side effects. We used an unsupervised clustering approach to identify three major groups of clozapine consumers. Cluster A (19%) had the lowest safety ratings, aversion to blood work, and a high rate of side effects that associate with lower safety ratings. Cluster B (25%) experienced more hospitalizations and reported satisfaction with clozapine that correlated with efficacy ratings, irrespective of safety ratings. Cluster C (56%) experienced fewer hospitalizations, fewer previous drug trials, greater educational attainment, lower rates of smoking, and rated clozapine more highly. This work identifies common side effects that influence the subjective safety of clozapine and suggests that attitudes toward clozapine depend on context-specific factors.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Kenya Psychosis-Risk Outcomes Study (KePROS): Development of an Accelerated Medicine Partnership Schizophrenia (AMP SCZ)-Aligned Project in Africa Schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD): an empirical benchmark study of real-world diagnostic accuracy and reliability among leading international psychiatrists Predictors of Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotic Medication Use in Patients with Schizophrenia Spectrum, Bipolar, and Other Psychotic Disorders in a United States Community-based, Integrated Health System Childhood Anxiety Symptoms as a Predictor of Psychotic Experiences in Adolescence in a High-Risk Cohort for Psychiatric Disorders Add-on Sodium Benzoate and N-Acetylcysteine in patients with early schizophrenia spectrum disorder: a multicentre, double-blind, randomised placebo controlled feasibility trial
×
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