Cargando…
A Survey Study on Clinicians’ Rationale and Attitude Towards the Prescription of Antipsychotic Polypharmacy in the East Perth Metropolitan Area in Western Australia
Objective Patients challenging refractory and residual psychotic symptoms have led to the concomitant use of combined antipsychotics, which was later introduced and labelled ‘antipsychotic polypharmacy’ (APP). Many clinicians have become somewhat hesitant to adjust psychotropic medication dosages, r...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Cureus
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10098027/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37064723 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.37234 |
Sumario: | Objective Patients challenging refractory and residual psychotic symptoms have led to the concomitant use of combined antipsychotics, which was later introduced and labelled ‘antipsychotic polypharmacy’ (APP). Many clinicians have become somewhat hesitant to adjust psychotropic medication dosages, resulting in a higher dose and combination prescription of antipsychotics and only achieving modest success. This study examines and investigates clinician perspectives and the rationale for the prescription of antipsychotic polypharmacy. Methods A structured questionnaire designed to reflect 15 target-directed questions evaluating clinicians’ attitudes and rationale on antipsychotic polypharmacy prescription was administered from November to December 2022. Information was obtained from inpatient and outpatient prescribers (psychiatric consultants) in two government-funded psychiatric facilities and outpatient clinics in the East Perth Metropolitan Area in Western Australia. Results After exclusion, a total of 45 participants’ responses were analysed. These results suggest a higher frequency of questions relating to the prescription of APP based on previous prescribers’ consultation and recommendation from a prior treating team; senior nurses’ pressure impacting clinicians’ decisions on APP perception; and the patient’s risk of aggression impacting the clinician’s rationale for the prescription of APP. Conclusions Clinicians’ rationale and attitude towards the prescription of APP are mostly influenced by recommendations from prior treatment teams or consultations and patients’ risk for aggression without compromising practice guidelines. Our findings also highlight the need to evaluate prescribers’ attitudes and how it presents an opportunity to enhance patients’ holistic outcomes. |
---|