Grigori Joffe

Seclusion and restraint in psychiatry: patients' experiences and practical suggestions on how to improve practices and use alternatives.

PURPOSEnThis study explored psychiatric inpatients experiences of, and their suggestions for, improvement of seclusion/restraint, and alternatives to their use in Finland.nnnMETHODSnThe data were collected by focused interviews (n= 30) and were analyzed with inductive content analysis.nnnRESULTSnPatients perspectives received insufficient attention during seclusion/restraint processes. Improvements (e.g., humane treatment) and alternatives (e.g., empathetic patient-staff interaction) to seclusion/restraint, as suggested by the patients, focused on essential parts of nursing practice but have not been largely adopted.nnnPRACTICE IMPLICATIONSnPatients basic needs have to be met, and patient-staff interaction has to also continue during seclusion/restraint. Providing patients with meaningful activities, planning beforehand, documenting the patients wishes, and making patient-staff agreements reduce the need for restrictions and offer alternatives for seclusion/restraint. Service users must be involved in all practical development.

Patient restrictions: Are there ethical alternatives to seclusion and restraint?

The use of patient restrictions (e.g. involuntary admission, seclusion, restraint) is a complex ethical dilemma in psychiatric care. The present study explored nurses’ (n = 22) and physicians’ (n = 5) perceptions of what actually happens when an aggressive behaviour episode occurs on the ward and what alternatives to seclusion and restraint are actually in use as normal standard practice in acute psychiatric care. The data were collected by focus group interviews and analysed by inductive content analysis. The participants believed that the decision-making process for managing patients’ aggressive behaviour contains some in-built ethical dilemmas. They thought that patients’ subjective perspective received little attention. Nevertheless, the staff proposed and appeared to use a number of alternatives to minimize or replace the use of seclusion and restraint. Medical and nursing staff need to be encouraged and taught to: (1) tune in more deeply to reasons for patients’ aggressive behaviour; and (2) use alternatives to seclusion and restraint in order to humanize patient care to a greater extent.

Add-on mirtazapine enhances antipsychotic effect of first generation antipsychotics in schizophrenia: A double-blind, randomized, placebo- controlled trial

BACKGROUNDnMirtazapine, an antidepressant with a broad spectrum of receptor affinity may, if combined with first generation antipsyhotics (FGAs), improve clinical profile of the FGAs. However, potentiation of the antipsychotic effect by mirtazapine has not been reported thus far. We explored the efficacy of adjunctive mirtazapine on symptoms of schizophrenia in patients having an insufficient response to different FGAs.nnnMETHODSnSchizophrenia-diagnosed patients with a prolonged disease and a history of a poor response to numerous antipsychotics, who were at least moderately ill despite their FGAs treatment, received add-on mirtazapine (n=20) or placebo (n=19) in a 6-week double-blind randomized controlled trial (RCT). The analysis was made on a Modified Intent-to-Treat (MITT) basis with Last Observations Carried Forward (LOCF).nnnRESULTSnMirtazapine outranged placebo on almost all measures. The clear-cut clinical relevance of this finding was demonstrated by a large effect size of 1.00 (95% CI 0.23-1.67, p=0.003) on the total Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) scores (the primary outcome). The PANSS positive subscale scores decreased by 17.2% with mirtazapine vs. 1.6% with placebo (p<0.001), and the PANSS negative subscale scores by 12% and 3% (p<0.001), correspondingly.nnnCONCLUSIONSnThis is the first RCT reporting a robust additive antipsychotic effect of an adjunctive antidepressant. Mirtazapine-FGAs combination appears to be a safe, well-tolerated and efficacious treatment option in this challenging population. These findings are important due to the current re-emerging attention to FGAs. The focus of further studies should be expanded to include combinations with or switching to novel antipsychotics, different subpopulations of patients with schizophrenia, finding of optimal doses, and comparison with clozapine.

Effects of add-on mirtazapine on neurocognition in schizophrenia: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study

Mirtazapine added to antipsychotics appears to improve the clinical picture of schizophrenia, including both negative and positive symptoms. This study explored the effect of adjunctive mirtazapine on neurocognition in patients with schizophrenia who had shown an insufficient response to first-generation antipsychotics (FGAs). Thirty-seven schizophrenia patients, who were at least moderately ill despite their FGA treatment, received add-on mirtazapine (n=19) or placebo (n=18) in a 6-wk double-blind, randomized trial. Widely used neuropsychological tests were performed to explore visual-spatial functions, verbal and visual memory, executive functions, verbal fluency and general mental and psychomotor speed. The data were analysed on the modified intent-to-treat basis with last observation carried forward. False discovery rate was applied to correct for multiple testing. Mirtazapine outperformed placebo in the domains of visual-spatial ability and general mental speed/attentional control as assessed by, correspondingly, Block Design and Stroop dots. The difference in the degree of change (i.e. change while on mirtazapine minus that on placebo) was 18.6% (p=0.044) and 11.1% (p=0.044), respectively. Adjunctive mirtazapine might offer a safe, effective and cost-saving option as a neurocognitive enhancer for FGA-treated schizophrenia patients. Mirtazapine+FGA combinations may become especially useful in light of the currently increasing attention towards FGAs. Larger and longer studies that incorporate functional outcomes, as well as comparisons with second-generation antipsychotics are, however, still needed for more definite conclusions.

Secluded and restrained patients' perceptions of their treatment

Though some empirical and anecdotal accounts can be located in the extant literature, it remains the case that little is known about how secluded/restrained (S/R) patients perceive their overall treatment. The purpose of this study was to explore patients perceptions of their hospital treatment measured after S/R. The data were collected with a Secluded and Restrained Patients Perceptions of their Treatment (S/R-PPT) questionnaire from S/R patients aged 18-65 years. Ninety completed questionnaires were analysed. Patients perceived that they received enough attention from staff, and they were able to voice their opinions, but their opinions were not taken into account. Patients denied the necessity and beneficence of S/R. Women and older patients were more critical than men and younger patients regarding the use of restrictions. There were also statistically-significant differences in responses among patients at different hospitals. It is concluded that patients opinions need more attention in treatment decisions. To achieve this, psychiatric treatment needs genuine dialogue between patients and staff, and individual care should have alternatives and no routine decisions. Therefore, the treatment culture must improve towards involving patients in treatment planning, and giving them a say when S/R is considered.

Orlistat in Clozapine- or Olanzapine-Treated Patients With Overweight or Obesity: A 16-Week Open-Label Extension Phase and Both Phases of a Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVEnTo explore long-term effects of orlistat in adult clozapine- or olanzapine-treated patients with DSM-IV-diagnosed schizophrenia and overweight or obesity who tolerate orlistat.nnnMETHODnOrlistat or placebo was added to clozapine or olanzapine in stable doses in a 16-week randomized controlled trial. Open-label orlistat was added to the antipsychotics during a 16-week extension phase for those completing the double-blind phase. No low-calorie diet or participation in behavioral programs was required. Body weight (primary outcome) and some metabolic parameters were measured prospectively. Analyses were performed for those completing both phases (ie, population differing from that reported earlier). The study was conducted from 2004 through 2005.nnnRESULTSnDuring the open-label phase, the 44 patients experienced mean ± SD body weight loss of -1.29 ± 3.04 kg, P = .007. During both phases, men (but not women) showed a weight loss of -2.39 ± 5.45 kg, P = .023. Some subgroups showed desirable changes in several metabolic parameters. Prolonged (32 weeks) orlistat treatment yielded no additional benefits as compared to short (16 weeks) treatment.nnnCONCLUSIONSnIn clozapine- or olanzapine-treated overweight or obese patients able to take orlistat on a long-term basis, the drug, with no concomitant hypocaloric diet or behavioral interventions, caused moderate weight loss only in men. However, some metabolic benefits may be achieved independently of weight changes. In patients who do not respond to orlistat within the first 16 weeks, continuation treatment may provide no additional benefits.nnnTRIAL REGISTRATIONncontrolled-trials.com Identifier: ISRCTN65731856.

More evidence on additive antipsychotic effect of adjunctive mirtazapine in schizophrenia: an extension phase of a randomized controlled trial†‡

Adjunctive mirtazapine improved negative symptoms of schizophrenia in several studies. Recently, we found an improvement also in positive symptoms when mirtazapine was added to first generation antipsychotics (FGAs) in a 6 week randomized controlled trial (RCT). The short duration of that trial was its limitation. This study aimed to explore whether longer treatment is worthwhile.

More evidence on proneurocognitive effects of add-on mirtazapine in schizophrenia

Enhancement of neurocognition is essential in the treatment of schizophrenia. In our previously reported six-week randomized controlled trial (RCT) mirtazapine added to conventional antipsychotics improved not only negative, but also positive symptoms and neurocognition in difficult-to-treat schizophrenia. The present study aimed to explore whether a prolonged exposure to mirtazapine could further improve neurocognition. Completers of the RCT who were able and willing to proceed to the extension phase received open label mirtazapine for an additional 6 weeks. During the extension phase, both groups (i.e., patients who previously received mirtazapine and those who received placebo) and the whole population showed improvement on a number of neurocognitive tests. Patients who shifted to open label mirtazapine from placebo achieved in the six following weeks similar results as their initially mirtazapine-treated counterparts did during their first 6 weeks of mirtazapine exposure. Middle-term mirtazapine treatment (12 weeks) demonstrated an advantage over short-term mirtazapine treatment (6 weeks) on Stroop Dots time and Trail Making Test, part B, number of mistakes (t = -2.562, p = 0.035 and t = -2.42, p = 0.043, correspondingly). Mirtazapine added to antipsychotics consistently shows desirable effects on neurocognition. Lengthy treatment seems worthwhile. Mirtazapine may become a safe and cost-saving neurocognitive enhancer in schizophrenia, yet more studies are needed.

Impact of eLearning course on nurses' professional competence in seclusion and restraint practices: a randomized controlled study (ISRCTN32869544).

Education on the care of aggressive and disturbed patients is fragmentary. eLearning could ensure the quality of such education, but data on its impact on professional competence in psychiatry are lacking. The aim of this study was to explore the impact of ePsychNurse.Net, an eLearning course, on psychiatric nurses professional competence in seclusion and restraint and on their job satisfaction and general self-efficacy. In a randomized controlled study, 12 wards were randomly assigned to ePsychNurse.Net (intervention) or education as usual (control). Baseline and 3-month follow-up data on nurses knowledge of coercion-related legislation, physical restraint and seclusion, their attitudes towards physical restraint and seclusion, job satisfaction and general self-efficacy were analysed for 158 completers. Knowledge (primary outcome) of coercion-related legislation improved in the intervention group, while knowledge of physical restraint improved and knowledge of seclusion remained unchanged in both groups. General self-efficacy improved in the intervention group also attitude to seclusion in the control group. In between-group comparison, attitudes to seclusion (one of secondary outcomes) favoured the control group. Although the ePsychNurse.Net demonstrated only slight advantages over conventional learning, it may be worth further development with, e.g. flexible time schedule and individualized content.

The effectiveness of technology-based patient education on self-reported deprivation of liberty among people with severe mental illness: A randomized controlled trial

Deprivation of liberty (DL) in psychiatric inpatient care is common worldwide. As liberty is a central element of patients’ rights, there is a need to develop most effective methods supporting patients’ personal liberty. The article presents initial results from a study to determine the effectiveness of an information technology (IT)-based patient education programme on patients’ experiences of being deprived of their liberty during their in-hospital stay. An overall sample of 311 patients with schizophrenia spectrum psychosis was randomized into three groups: an intervention group with needs-based computerized patient education, a patient education group with conventional education and a control group with standard care. Data on the general experience of DL were collected at baseline and during the patient discharge process. In general, all patients experienced less DL at the time of their discharge. The change in patients’ experiences of their DL did not differ statistically between the three groups. Male patients in the standard care group were significantly more likely to drop out of the study than female patients. Although technology-based patient education was not found to be superior to other approaches, we did not find any reason to inhibit its utilization in patient care among persons with severe mental health problems. From the healthcare organizations’ perspective, a cost-effectiveness analysis is needed, as the IT education was slightly more time-consuming.