Cargando…
Dose-tapering trajectories in patients with remitted psychosis undergoing guided antipsychotic reduction to reach minimum effective dose
BACKGROUND: Patients with remitted psychosis wish to reduce antipsychotic doses yet facing increased risks of relapse. Examining dose-tapering processes may provide insights to re-evaluate the risk-to-benefit balance. We aimed to depict and subgroup tapering trajectories, and explore factors associa...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Cambridge University Press
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10594210/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37578111 http://dx.doi.org/10.1192/j.eurpsy.2023.2440 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: Patients with remitted psychosis wish to reduce antipsychotic doses yet facing increased risks of relapse. Examining dose-tapering processes may provide insights to re-evaluate the risk-to-benefit balance. We aimed to depict and subgroup tapering trajectories, and explore factors associated with different dose-reduction patterns. METHODS: A 2-year open-label randomized prospective comparative trial from August 2017 to September 2022 in Taiwan. Patients with a history of schizophrenia-related psychotic disorders under stable medications and symptoms were eligible, randomizing a proportion to conduct guided dose reduction. We depicted the trajectories of individual patients and named subgroups based on dose-tapering patterns. Predictors of baseline characteristics for designated subgroups were examined by logistic regression analysis; changes in outcomes were compared by paired t-test. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients undergoing guided dose reduction, 18 (35.3%) reduced 4 steps consecutively (sequential reducers, SR), 14 (27.5%) reduced 1 to 3 steps (modest reducers, MR), 3 (5.9%) re-escalated to previous level (alert reducers, AR), 7 (13.7%) returned to baseline level (baseline returners, BR), 6 (11.7%) relapsed (failed reducers, FR) and 3 (5.9%) withdrew without relapse (early exits, EE). Patients with a history of relapse assumed a conservative dose-tapering pace; only the SR subgroup exhibited significant improvements in functioning and quality of life while failing to identify variables for predicting who would become SR or FR. CONCLUSIONS: Guided dose reduction comprises dynamic processes with differences between individual trajectories. The proposed naming of dose-tapering patterns/subgroups provides a framework depicting patients undergoing dose-tapering. Longer-term observation and more flexible tapering approaches are anticipated to reveal favorable outcomes. |
---|