Cargando…

Side-Effect Monitoring for Patients on Depot Antipsychotic Medication Within a Community Treatment Team

AIMS: To determine whether the community treatment team (CTT) were meeting the following three trust standards for patients receiving antipsychotic depot medication: 1. 100% of patients should have side effects monitored using a validated scoring system in the form of the Glasgow Antipsychotic Side-...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Waterman, Harry, Zaborowska, Hanna, Taylor, Julie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cambridge University Press 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10345789/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1192/bjo.2023.483
_version_ 1785073170603048960
author Waterman, Harry
Zaborowska, Hanna
Taylor, Julie
author_facet Waterman, Harry
Zaborowska, Hanna
Taylor, Julie
author_sort Waterman, Harry
collection PubMed
description AIMS: To determine whether the community treatment team (CTT) were meeting the following three trust standards for patients receiving antipsychotic depot medication: 1. 100% of patients should have side effects monitored using a validated scoring system in the form of the Glasgow Antipsychotic Side-effect Scale (GASS) once yearly. 2. 100% of patients should have had a GASS completed ever. 3. 100% of patients with a completed GASS should have this document available in full. Additionally adherence to these measures was compared to the previous year's audit to assess for change following interventions and change in documentation. METHODS: A list of 146 patients receiving antipsychotic depot medication within the CTT was produced and subsequently set up in a Microsoft excel spreadsheet. Exclusion criteria were then applied as follows: any patient no longer under the CTT, any patient no longer on depot antipsychotics and any patient admitted in hospital at the time of audit (to allow for comparison to previous year where this was applied.) Following this 127 patients remained for whom I accessed their online notes and searched for evidence of completed GASS, when this was completed and if the full completed form was available. Once these data were gathered percentage of completion was calculated for each of the three standards outlined above both overall and subsequently broken down by depot administration group. These results were then compared to the results of the previous year's audit. RESULTS: 1. In this audit 66% of patients had received a GASS in the previous year compared to 53% previously. 2. In this audit 97% of patients had a completed GASS ever compared to 95% previously. 3. In this audit 99% of patients with a completed GASS had the full document available compared to 98% previously. 4. Additionally significant variation between depot administration groups was identified ranging from 17% completion to 100% completion. CONCLUSION: It is clear the standards of 100% completion of GASS yearly are not being met however there was notable improvement following previous intervention suggesting this was beneficial and further interventions have been put in place including, but not limited to, supply of a spreadsheet with up to date list of when patients are due a repeat GASS for future tracking to further improve adherence to standards.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10345789
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Cambridge University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103457892023-07-15 Side-Effect Monitoring for Patients on Depot Antipsychotic Medication Within a Community Treatment Team Waterman, Harry Zaborowska, Hanna Taylor, Julie BJPsych Open Audit AIMS: To determine whether the community treatment team (CTT) were meeting the following three trust standards for patients receiving antipsychotic depot medication: 1. 100% of patients should have side effects monitored using a validated scoring system in the form of the Glasgow Antipsychotic Side-effect Scale (GASS) once yearly. 2. 100% of patients should have had a GASS completed ever. 3. 100% of patients with a completed GASS should have this document available in full. Additionally adherence to these measures was compared to the previous year's audit to assess for change following interventions and change in documentation. METHODS: A list of 146 patients receiving antipsychotic depot medication within the CTT was produced and subsequently set up in a Microsoft excel spreadsheet. Exclusion criteria were then applied as follows: any patient no longer under the CTT, any patient no longer on depot antipsychotics and any patient admitted in hospital at the time of audit (to allow for comparison to previous year where this was applied.) Following this 127 patients remained for whom I accessed their online notes and searched for evidence of completed GASS, when this was completed and if the full completed form was available. Once these data were gathered percentage of completion was calculated for each of the three standards outlined above both overall and subsequently broken down by depot administration group. These results were then compared to the results of the previous year's audit. RESULTS: 1. In this audit 66% of patients had received a GASS in the previous year compared to 53% previously. 2. In this audit 97% of patients had a completed GASS ever compared to 95% previously. 3. In this audit 99% of patients with a completed GASS had the full document available compared to 98% previously. 4. Additionally significant variation between depot administration groups was identified ranging from 17% completion to 100% completion. CONCLUSION: It is clear the standards of 100% completion of GASS yearly are not being met however there was notable improvement following previous intervention suggesting this was beneficial and further interventions have been put in place including, but not limited to, supply of a spreadsheet with up to date list of when patients are due a repeat GASS for future tracking to further improve adherence to standards. Cambridge University Press 2023-07-07 /pmc/articles/PMC10345789/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1192/bjo.2023.483 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. This does not need to be placed under each abstract, just each page is fine.
spellingShingle Audit
Waterman, Harry
Zaborowska, Hanna
Taylor, Julie
Side-Effect Monitoring for Patients on Depot Antipsychotic Medication Within a Community Treatment Team
title Side-Effect Monitoring for Patients on Depot Antipsychotic Medication Within a Community Treatment Team
title_full Side-Effect Monitoring for Patients on Depot Antipsychotic Medication Within a Community Treatment Team
title_fullStr Side-Effect Monitoring for Patients on Depot Antipsychotic Medication Within a Community Treatment Team
title_full_unstemmed Side-Effect Monitoring for Patients on Depot Antipsychotic Medication Within a Community Treatment Team
title_short Side-Effect Monitoring for Patients on Depot Antipsychotic Medication Within a Community Treatment Team
title_sort side-effect monitoring for patients on depot antipsychotic medication within a community treatment team
topic Audit
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10345789/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1192/bjo.2023.483
work_keys_str_mv AT watermanharry sideeffectmonitoringforpatientsondepotantipsychoticmedicationwithinacommunitytreatmentteam
AT zaborowskahanna sideeffectmonitoringforpatientsondepotantipsychoticmedicationwithinacommunitytreatmentteam
AT taylorjulie sideeffectmonitoringforpatientsondepotantipsychoticmedicationwithinacommunitytreatmentteam