Atypical antipsychotics in the treatment of pathological aggression in children and adolescents: literature review and clinical recommendations

Objective: To review the literature about the use of atypical antipsychotics in the treatment of pathological aggression in children and adolescents. Method: The databases MEDLINE, SciELO, and LILACS were searched for publications in Portuguese or English from 1992 to August 2011 using the following keywords: mental disease, child, adolescent, treatment, atypical antipsychotic, aggressive behavior, aggression, and violent behavior. Results: Sixty-seven studies of good methodological quality and clinical interest and relevance were identified. Studies including children and adolescents were relatively limited, because few atypical antipsychotics have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). All the medications included in this review (risperidone, olanzapine, quetiapine, ziprasidone, aripiprazole and clozapine) have some effectiveness in treating aggression in children and adolescents, and choices should be based on clinical indications and side effects. Conclusions: There are few studies about the effectiveness and safety of atypical antipsychotics for the pediatric population, and further randomized controlled studies with larger groups of patients and more diagnostic categories, such as severe conduct disorder and oppositional defiant disorder, should be conducted to confirm the results reported up to date and to evaluate the impact of long-term use.

Meta-analysis on the efficacy and tolerability of the augmentation of antidepressants with atypical antipsychotics in patients with major depressive disorder

We assessed the efficacy and tolerability of the augmentation of antidepressants (ATDs) with atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) to treat patients with major depressive disorder. A retrograde study to identify relevant patient data included databases of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects. Data from 17 trials, involving 3807 participants, were identified. The remission rate (RR) and overall response rate (ORR) of adjunctive treatment with AAPs were significantly higher than placebo treatment: RR=1.90 (95%CI=1.61-2.23, z=7.74, P<0.00001) and ORR=1.68 (95%CI=1.45-1.94, z=7.07, P<0.00001). We found that the short-term (4 weeks) treatment [ORR=1.70 (95%CI=0.98-2.95, Z=1.89, P=0.06)] was significantly different from the long-term (6-12 weeks) treatment [ORR=1.68 (95%CI=1.45-1.94, z=7.07, P<0.00001)]. No significant difference in ORR was observed between groups with or without sedative drugs. The discontinuation rate due to adverse effects was higher for adjunctive treatment with AAPs: ORR=3.32 (95%CI=2.35-4.70, z=6.78, P<0.00001). These results demonstrate that the augmentation of ATDs with AAPs (olanzapine, quetiapine, aripiprazole, and risperidone) was more effective than a placebo in improving response and remission rates, although associated with a higher discontinuation rate due to adverse effects.

Off-label utilization of antipsychotics

Résumé Ce travail s'inscrit dans un programme de recherche centré sur la pharmacovigilance en psychiatrie. Buts de l'étude Les nouveaux antipsychotiques atypiques sont prescrits avec beaucoup de succès, parce qu'ils présentent une sécurité dans leur emploi bien supérieure à celle des antipsychotiques classiques. Cette situation a conduit à une large prescription «off-label» (hors indication admise). Le but de ce travail a été d'étudier la pratique en matière de prescription des psychiatres hospitaliers en ce qui concerne les antipsychotiques en comparant des patients traités pour des psychoses ou d'autres indications officielles aux patients recevant un traitement antipsychotique «off-label». Méthode Dans le cadre d'un programme de pharmacovigilance - pharmacoépidemiologie, tous les médicaments prescrits à 5 jours de référence (entre 1999 et 2001) à l'hôpital psychiatrique universitaire de Lausanne (98 lits) ont été enregistrés, avec des données sur l'âge, le sexe et le diagnostic des patients. Les prescriptions de 202 patients ont été évaluées. Les patients ont été classés dans 3 groupes diagnostiques : (1) patient présentant des troubles psychotiques, (2) patient présentant des épisodes maniaques et des épisodes dépressifs avec des symptômes psychotiques, et (3) patient présentant d'autres troubles. Les groupes (1) et (2) forment une classe de patients recevant un antipsychotique pour une indication officielle, et les prescriptions dans le groupe (3) ont été considérées comme «off-label». Résultats principaux Moins de patients psychotiques ont reçu un antidépresseur (p<0.05) ou des hypnotiques non-benzodiazepine (p<0.001) comparés aux patients des deux autres groupes. Les patients présentant des troubles affectifs recevaient seulement exceptionnellement une combinaison d'un antipsychotique atypique et conventionnel, tandis qu'un nombre inférieur de patients avec des indications « off-label » ont reçu moins .souvent des antipsychotiques atypiques que ceux des deux groupes de comparaison (p<0.05). L'analyse statistique (stepwise logistic regression) a révélé que les patients présentant des troubles psychotiques avaient un risque plus élevé de recevoir un médicament antipsychotique d'une dose moyenne ou élevée, (p<0.001) en comparaison aux deux autres groupes. Conclusion Les nouveaux médicaments antipsychotiques semblent être prescrits avec moins d'hésitation principalement pour des indications admises. Les médecins prescrivent de nouveaux médicaments « off-label » seulement après avoir acquis une certaine expérience dans le domaine des indications approuvées, et ils étaient plus prudents en ce qui concerne la dose en traitant sur la base «off-label». Abstract Objective The new brands of atypical antipsychotics are very successfully prescribed because of their enhanced safety profiles and their larger pharmacological profile in comparison to the conventional antipsychotic. This has led to broad off-label utilisation. The aim of the present survey was to study the prescription practice of hospital psychiatrists with regard to antipsychotic drugs, comparing patients treated for psychoses or other registered indications to patients receiving an off-label antipsychotic treatment. Method As part of a pharmacovigilance/pharmacoepidemiology program, all drugs given on 5 reference days (1999 - 2001) in the 98-bed psychiatric hospital of the University of Lausanne, Switzerland, were recorded along with age, sex and diagnosis. The prescriptions of 202 patients were assessed. Patients were classified in 3 diagnostic groups: (1) patient with psychotic disorders, (2) patients with manic episodes and depressive episodes with psychotic symptoms, and (3) patients with other disorders. Group (1) and (2) formed the class of patients receiving an antipsychotic for a registered indication, and the prescriptions in group (3) were considered as off-label. Main results A lesser number of psychotic patients received antidepressant (p<0.05) and nonbenzodiazepine hypnotics (p<0.001) compared to the patients of the other two groups. The patients with affective disorders received only exceptionally a combination of an atypical and a conventional antipsychotic, whereas a lesser number of patients with off-label indications received less often atypical antipsychotics than those of the two comparison groups (p<0.05). Stepwise logistic regression revealed that patients with psychotic disorder were at higher risk of receiving an antipsychotic medication in medium or high dose (p<0.001), in comparison to the two other groups. Conclusions The new antipsychotic drugs seem to be prescribed with less hesitation mainly for approved indications. Physicians prescribe new drugs on off-label application only after having gained some experience in the field of the approved indications, and were more cautious with regard to dose when treating on an off-label basis.

Advantages and disadvantages of combination treatment with antipsychotics ECNP Consensus Meeting, March 2008, Nice.

TERMINOLOGY AND PRINCIPLES OF COMBINING ANTIPSYCHOTICS WITH A SECOND MEDICATION: The term "combination" includes virtually all the ways in which one medication may be added to another. The other commonly used terms are "augmentation" which implies an additive effect from adding a second medicine to that obtained from prescribing a first, an "add on" which implies adding on to existing, possibly effective treatment which, for one reason or another, cannot or should not be stopped. The issues that arise in all potential indications are: a) how long it is reasonable to wait to prove insufficiency of response to monotherapy; b) by what criteria that response should be defined; c) how optimal is the dose of the first monotherapy and, therefore, how confident can one be that its lack of effect is due to a truly inadequate response? Before one considers combination treatment, one or more of the following criteria should be met; a) monotherapy has been only partially effective on core symptoms; b) monotherapy has been effective on some concurrent symptoms but not others, for which a further medicine is believed to be required; c) a particular combination might be indicated de novo in some indications; d) The combination could improve tolerability because two compounds may be employed below their individual dose thresholds for side effects. Regulators have been concerned primarily with a and, in principle at least, c above. In clinical practice, the use of combination treatment reflects the often unsatisfactory outcome of treatment with single agents. ANTIPSYCHOTICS IN MANIA: There is good evidence that most antipsychotics tested show efficacy in acute mania when added to lithium or valproate for patients showing no or a partial response to lithium or valproate alone. Conventional 2-armed trial designs could benefit from a third antipsychotic monotherapy arm. In the long term treatment of bipolar disorder, in patients responding acutely to the addition of quetiapine to lithium or valproate, this combination reduces the subsequent risk of relapse to depression, mania or mixed states compared to monotherapy with lithium or valproate. Comparable data is not available for combination with other antipsychotics. ANTIPSYCHOTICS IN MAJOR DEPRESSION: Some atypical antipsychotics have been shown to induce remission when added to an antidepressant (usually a SSRI or SNRI) in unipolar patients in a major depressive episode unresponsive to the antidepressant monotherapy. Refractoriness is defined as at least 6 weeks without meeting an adequate pre-defined treatment response. Long term data is not yet available to support continuing efficacy. SCHIZOPHRENIA: There is only limited evidence to support the combination of two or more antipsychotics in schizophrenia. Any monotherapy should be given at the maximal tolerated dose and at least two antipsychotics of different action/tolerability and clozapine should be given as a monotherapy before a combination is considered. The addition of a high potency D2/3 antagonist to a low potency antagonist like clozapine or quetiapine is the logical combination to treat positive symptoms, although further evidence from well conducted clinical trials is needed. Other mechanisms of action than D2/3 blockade, and hence other combinations might be more relevant for negative, cognitive or affective symptoms. OBSESSIVE-COMPULSIVE DISORDER: SSRI monotherapy has moderate overall average benefit in OCD and can take as long as 3 months for benefit to be decided. Antipsychotic addition may be considered in OCD with tic disorder and in refractory OCD. For OCD with poor insight (OCD with "psychotic features"), treatment of choice should be medium to high dose of SSRI, and only in refractory cases, augmentation with antipsychotics might be considered. Augmentation with haloperidol and risperidone was found to be effective (symptom reduction of more than 35%) for patients with tics. For refractory OCD, there is data suggesting a specific role for haloperidol and risperidone as well, and some data with regard to potential therapeutic benefit with olanzapine and quetiapine. ANTIPSYCHOTICS AND ADVERSE EFFECTS IN SEVERE MENTAL ILLNESS: Cardio-metabolic risk in patients with severe mental illness and especially when treated with antipsychotic agents are now much better recognized and efforts to ensure improved physical health screening and prevention are becoming established.

The switch from conventional to atypical antipsychotic treatment should not be based exclusively on the presence of cognitive deficits. A pilot study in individuals with schizophrenia.

Background: Atypical antipsychotics provide better control of the negative and affective symptoms of schizophrenia when compared with conventional neuroleptics; nevertheless, their heightened ability to improve cognitive dysfunction remains a matter of debate. This study aimed to examine the changes in cognition associated with long-term antipsychotic treatment and to evaluate the effect of the type of antipsychotic (conventional versus novel antipsychotic drugs) on cognitive performance over time. Methods: In this naturalistic study, we used a comprehensive neuropsychological battery of tests to assess a sample of schizophrenia patients taking either conventional (n = 13) or novel antipsychotics (n = 26) at baseline and at two years after. Results: Continuous antipsychotic treatment regardless of class was associated with improvement on verbal fluency, executive functions, and visual and verbal memory. Patients taking atypical antipsychotics did not show greater cognitive enhancement over two years than patients taking conventional antipsychotics. Conclusions Although long-term antipsychotic treatment slightly improved cognitive function, the switch from conventional to atypical antipsychotic treatment should not be based exclusively on the presence of these cognitive deficits.

Efficacy of modern antipsychotics in placebo-controlled trials in bipolar depression: a meta-analysis.

Randomized, controlled trials have demonstrated efficacy for second-generation antipsychotics in the treatment of acute mania in bipolar disorder. Despite depression being considered the hallmark of bipolar disorder, there are no published systematic reviews or meta-analyses to evaluate the efficacy of modern atypical antipsychotics in bipolar depression. We systematically reviewed published or registered randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) of modern antipsychotics in adult bipolar I and/or II depressive patients (DSM-IV criteria). Efficacy outcomes were assessed based on changes in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) during an 8-wk period. Data were combined through meta-analysis using risk ratio as an effect size with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI) and with a level of statistical significance of 5% (p<0.05). We identified five RCTs; four involved antipsychotic monotherapy and one addressed both monotherapy and combination with an antidepressant. The two quetiapine trials analysed the safety and efficacy of two doses: 300 and 600 mg/d. The only olanzapine trial assessed olanzapine monotherapy within a range of 5-20 mg/d and olanzapine-fluoxetine combination within a range of 5-20 mg/d and 6-12 mg/d, respectively. The two aripiprazole placebo-controlled trials assessed doses of 5-30 mg/d. Quetiapine and olanzapine trials (3/5, 60%) demonstrated superiority over placebo (p<0.001). Only 2/5 (40%) (both aripiprazole trials) failed in the primary efficacy measure after the first 6 wk. Some modern antipsychotics (quetiapine and olanzapine) have demonstrated efficacy in bipolar depressive patients from week 1 onwards. Rapid onset of action seems to be a common feature of atypical antipsychotics in bipolar depression. Comment in The following popper user interface control may not be accessible. Tab to the next button to revert the control to an accessible version.Destroy user interface controlEfficacy of modern antipsychotics in placebo-controlled trials in bipolar depression: a meta-analysis--results to be interpreted with caution.

Efficacy of modern antipsychotics in placebo-controlled trials in bipolar depression: a meta-analysis.

Randomized, controlled trials have demonstrated efficacy for second-generation antipsychotics in the treatment of acute mania in bipolar disorder. Despite depression being considered the hallmark of bipolar disorder, there are no published systematic reviews or meta-analyses to evaluate the efficacy of modern atypical antipsychotics in bipolar depression. We systematically reviewed published or registered randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) of modern antipsychotics in adult bipolar I and/or II depressive patients (DSM-IV criteria). Efficacy outcomes were assessed based on changes in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) during an 8-wk period. Data were combined through meta-analysis using risk ratio as an effect size with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI) and with a level of statistical significance of 5% (p<0.05). We identified five RCTs; four involved antipsychotic monotherapy and one addressed both monotherapy and combination with an antidepressant. The two quetiapine trials analysed the safety and efficacy of two doses: 300 and 600 mg/d. The only olanzapine trial assessed olanzapine monotherapy within a range of 5-20 mg/d and olanzapine-fluoxetine combination within a range of 5-20 mg/d and 6-12 mg/d, respectively. The two aripiprazole placebo-controlled trials assessed doses of 5-30 mg/d. Quetiapine and olanzapine trials (3/5, 60%) demonstrated superiority over placebo (p<0.001). Only 2/5 (40%) (both aripiprazole trials) failed in the primary efficacy measure after the first 6 wk. Some modern antipsychotics (quetiapine and olanzapine) have demonstrated efficacy in bipolar depressive patients from week 1 onwards. Rapid onset of action seems to be a common feature of atypical antipsychotics in bipolar depression. Comment in The following popper user interface control may not be accessible. Tab to the next button to revert the control to an accessible version.Destroy user interface controlEfficacy of modern antipsychotics in placebo-controlled trials in bipolar depression: a meta-analysis--results to be interpreted with caution.

Alstonine as an Antipsychotic: Effects on Brain Amines and Metabolic Changes

Managing schizophrenia has never been a trivial matter. Furthermore, while classical antipsychotics induce extrapyramidal side effects and hyperprolactinaemia, atypical antipsychotics lead to diabetes, hyperlipidaemia, and weight gain. Moreover, even with newer drugs, a sizable proportion of patients do not show significant improvement. Alstonine is an indole alkaloid identified as the major component of a plant-based remedy used in Nigeria to treat the mentally ill. Alstonine presents a clear antipsychotic profile in rodents, apparently with differential effects in distinct dopaminergic pathways. The aim of this study was to complement the antipsychotic profile of alstonine, verifying its effects on brain amines in mouse frontal cortex and striatum. Additionally, we examined if alstonine induces some hormonal and metabolic changes common to antipsychotics. HPLC data reveal that alstonine increases serotonergic transmission and increases intraneuronal dopamine catabolism. In relation to possible side effects, preliminary data suggest that alstonine does not affect prolactin levels, does not induce gains in body weight, but prevents the expected fasting-induced decrease in glucose levels. Overall, this study reinforces the proposal that alstonine is a potential innovative antipsychotic, and that a comprehensive understanding of its neurochemical basis may open new avenues to developing newer antipsychotic medications.

Substance misuse in patients with schizophrenia: epidemiology and management

Substance misuse in individuals with schizophrenia is very common, especially in young men, in communities where use is frequent and in people receiving inpatient treatment. Problematic use occurs at very low intake levels, so that most affected people are not physically dependent (with the exception of nicotine). People with schizophrenia and substance misuse have poorer symptomatic and functional outcomes than those with schizophrenia alone. Unless there is routine screening, substance misuse is often missed in assessments. Service systems tend to be separated, with poor inter-communication, and affected patients are often excluded from services because of their comorbidity. However, effective management of these disorders requires a fully integrated approach because of the close inter-relationship of the disorders. Use of atypical antipsychotics may be especially important in this population because of growing evidence (especially on clozapine and risperidone) that nicotine smoking, alcohol misuse and possibly some other substance misuse is reduced. Several pharmacotherapies for substance misuse can be used safely in people with schizophrenia, but the evidence base is small and guidelines for their use are necessarily derived from experience in the general population.

Pro re nata medication for psychoses: an audit of practice in two metropolitan hospitals

Objective: To examine the use of pro re nata (PRN) (as needed) medication in hospitalized patients with psychotic disorders. Methods: Retrospective chart reviews were conducted at two large public psychiatry units situated in inner city general hospitals. Pro re nata medication prescription, administration and outcomes were examined during inpatient episodes of care for 184 consecutive admissions of patients diagnosed with a psychotic disorder. Patient demographics, diagnoses, and regularly prescribed medication were also recorded. All admissions were drawn from a three-month period from December 1998-February 1999. Results: The most prevalent diagnoses were schizophrenia related disorders (n = 111) and mania (n = 34). Substance use disorders (n = 49) were the most common comorbid dis-orders. Pro re nata medication was administered during the acute phase of 82% of admissions. Drugs prescribed Pro re nata were mostly typical antipsychotics, benzodiazepines and/or anti-cholinergics. Coprescription of typical antipsychotics PRN with regularly scheduled atypical antipsychotics was common (64%). Pro re nata medications accounted for 31% of the total antipsychotic dose and 28% of the total anxiolytic dose administered during acute treatment. Higher daily doses of PRN medication were given to manic patients, males, younger patients and those with substance use disorders. Pro re nata prescriptions usually specified a maximum daily dose (87%) but rarely gave indications for use (6%). Adminis-tration records frequently lacked a specified reason for use (48%) or a notation of outcome (64%). Unit staff noted medication-related morbidity in 37% of patients receiving PRN medication, compared to 3% of patients receiving only regularly scheduled medication. Extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) were most frequently associated with administration of PRN haloperidol (Relative Risk vs other PRN medications = 5.61, 95% CI = 2.36-13.73). Conclusions: Pro re nata medications comprised a significant part of the treatment which psychotic patients received. The common practice of coprescribing PRN typical antipsychotics with scheduled atypical antipsychotics is potentially problematical since administration of PRN medication is associated with significant medication related morbidity. Preferential use of benzodiazepines as PRN agents may minimize this morbidity and foster subsequent compliance with regularly prescribed antipsychotics.

Health-related quality of life and functioning in bipolar disorder: the impact of pharmacotherapy.

Bipolar disorder has a major deleterious impact on many aspects of a patient's functioning and health-related quality of life. Although the formal measurement of these deficits has been neglected until recently, many well-designed trials now include an assessment of functioning and health-related quality of life using one or more rating scales. This review describes recent developments in the measurement of functioning and health-related quality of life in bipolar disorder, and discusses the evidence that medications that improve symptoms in bipolar disorder also offer clinically relevant benefits in functioning and health-related quality of life. Direct comparisons of the benefits of medications including atypical antipsychotics are problematic due to differences in trial populations, study durations and rating scales. Data from quetiapine trials indicate that this medication offers prompt and sustained improvement of functioning in patients with mania and enhancement of health-related quality of life in patients with bipolar depression, to accompany the significant improvements in mood episodes.

Prescribing practices in German and Swiss psychiatric university and in non-university hospitals : national differences

RÉSUMÉ Il existe dans la pratique de prescription des médicaments de grandes variations entre les hôpitaux. Ces variations sont d'origines multifactorielles, comme par exemple des traditions de prescriptions locales, des considérations pharmato-économiques, la disponibilité d'un médicament, des différences de population, la prévalence d'une maladie, etc. Les études disponibles sur les pratiques de prescription sont souvent réduites à un centre unique, à une région ou à un pays. L'emploi de méthodes et de définitions particulières a jusqu'à pressent limité des comparaisons plus étendues entre les pays et régions. Le but de cette étude est de comparer la pratique de prescription de nouveaux médicaments psychotropes dans des cliniques suisses et allemandes. Cinq hôpitaux psychiatriques ont été sélectionnés, faisant tous partie du projet AMSP, et représentant des cliniques suisses, allemandes, de niveau universitaire ou non. Des données sur 572 patients et 1745 prescriptions ont été collectées durant un jour précis. Les comparaisons ont été ajustées pour l'âge et le sexe. Une différence significative (p <0.001) a été trouvée dans la prescription de nouveaux médicaments antidépresseurs, les cliniciens suisses en donnant en moyenne plus (65.2%) que les allemands (48.3%). Aucune différence significative n'a été démontrée dans la prescription des nouveaux médicaments antipsychotiques atypiques. Il semble en conséquence que les psychiatres suisses ont une propension plus élevée à prescrire des nouveaux médicaments antidépresseurs. Cela semble être dû à des différences de traditions de prescriptions nationales ou régionales. D'autres études sont nécessaires pour investiguer les influences économiques sur la pratique de prescription dans des cliniques suisses et allemandes. SUMMARY Obiective: There are great variations between hospitals in the way drugs are prescribed and these variations may be due to multiple factors such as local prescribing traditions, pharmacoeconomic considerations, drug availability; regional differences of population, disease prevalence etc. Available studies on prescribing habits have, besides studies performed in a unique centre, until now often been restricted to single countries or regions and the comparisons across countries or regions have often been limited by the use of diverse methodologies and definitions. The aim of the present study was to compare drug prescriptions between German and Swiss psychiatric services with regard to their preference of newer psychotropics. Material, method: Five psychiatric hospitals, associated to the AMSP-project, were chosen to represent Swiss and German clinics, university and non-university settings. Data were available from one index day on 572 patients and 1745 prescriptions. The comparisons were adjusted for age and gender. Results: There was a significant difference (p < 0.001) with regard to the prescription of newer antidepressants (NAD), Swiss clinicians giving proportionally more (65.2 %) than the German psychiatrists (48.3 %). No significant difference was, on the other hand, found as to the proportion of atypical antipsychotics, the lack of difference being due to the higher proportion of clozapine among the atypical antipsychotics in Germany. Conclusion: There seems therefore to be a higher propensity for Swiss hospital psychiatrists to prescribe newer antidepressants. This seems to be due to national or regional prescribing traditions. Further studies are needed to investigate the economical influences on antidepressant prescribing in Swiss and German clinics.)

Delirium auf der Intensivstation [Delirium in the intensive care unit.]

The prevalence of delirium in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) is reported to vary from 20 to 80 %. Delirium in the ICU is not only a frightening experience for the patient and his or her family, it is also a challenge for the nurses and physicians taking care of the patient. Furthermore, it is also associated with worse outcome, prolonged hospitalisation, increased costs, long-term cognitive impairment and higher mortality rates. Thus, strategies to prevent ICU-delirium in addition to the early diagnosis and treatment of delirium are important. The pathophysiology of delirium is still incompletely understood, but numerous risk factors for the development of delirium have been identified in ICU-patients, among which are potentially modifiable factors such as metabolic disturbances, hypotension, anaemia, fever and infection. Key factors are the prevention and management of common risk factors, including avoiding overzealous sedation and analgesia and creating an environment that enhances reintegration. Once delirium is diagnosed, treatment consists of the use of typical and atypical antipsychotics. Haloperidol is still the drug of choice for the treatment of delirium and can be given intravenously in incremental doses of 1 to 2 to 5 (to 10) mg every 15 - 20 minutes.

Validation française de l'échelle d'expérience temporelle du plaisir [Validation of the Temporal Experience of Pleasure Scale (TEPS) in a French-speaking environment.]

INTRODUCTION: Anhedonia is defined as a diminished capacity to experience pleasant emotion and is commonly included among the negative symptoms of schizophrenia. However, if patients report experiencing a lower level of pleasure than controls, they report experiencing as much pleasure as controls with online measurements of emotion. OBJECTIVE: The Temporal Experience of Pleasure Scale (TEPS) measures pleasure experienced in the moment and in anticipation of future activities. The TEPS is an 18-item self-report measurement of anticipatory (10 items) and consummatory (eight items) pleasure. The goal of this paper is to assess the psychometric characteristics of the French translation of this scale. METHODS: A control sample was composed of 60 women and 22 men, with a mean age of 38.1 years (S.D.: 10.8). Thirty-six were without qualification and 46 with qualified professional diploma. A sample of 21 patients meeting DSM IV-TR criteria for schizophrenia was recruited among the community psychiatry service of the department of psychiatry in Lausanne. They were five women and 16 men; mean age was of 34.1 years (S.D.: 7.5). Ten obtained a professional qualification and 11 were without qualification. None worked in competitive employment. Their mean dose of chlorpromazine equivalent was 431mg (S.D.: 259). All patients were on atypical antipsychotics. The control sample fulfilled the TEPS and the Physical Anhedonia Scale (PAS). The patient sample fulfilled the TEPS and was independently rated on the Calgary Depression Scale and the Scale for Assessment of Negative Symptoms. For comparison with controls, patients were matched on age, sex and professional qualification. This required the supplementary recruitment of two control subjects. RESULTS: Results with the control sample indicate that the TEPS presents an acceptable internal validity with Crombach alphas of 0.84 for the total scale, 0.74 for the anticipatory pleasure scale and 0.79 for the consummatory pleasure scale. The confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the model is well adapted to our data (chi(2)/dl=1.333; df=134; p<0.0006; root mean square residual, RMSEA=0.064). External validity measured with the PAS showed R=-0.27 (p<0.05) for the consummatory scale and R=-0.26 for the total score. Comparisons between patients and matched controls indicated that patients were significantly lower than control on anticipatory pleasure (t=2.7, df(40), 2-tailed p=0.01; cohen's d=0.83) and on total score of the TEPS (t=2.8, df (40), 2-tailed p=0.01; cohen's d=0.87). The two samples did not differ on consummatory pleasure. The anticipatory pleasure factor and the total TEPS showed significant negative correlation with the SANS anhedonia, respectively R=-0.78 (p<0.01) for the anticipatory factor and R=-0.61 (p<0.01) for the total TEPS. There was also a negative correlation between the anticipatory factor and the SANS avolition of R=-0.50 (p<0.05). These correlations were maintained, with partial correlations controlling for depression and chlorpromazine equivalents. CONCLUSION: The results of this validation show that the French version of the TEPS has psychometric characteristics similar to the original version. These results highlight the discrepancy between results of direct or indirect report of experienced pleasure in patients with schizophrenia. Patients may have difficulties in anticipating the pleasure of future enjoyable activities, but not in experiencing pleasure once in an enjoyable activity. Medication and depression do not seems to modify our results, but this should be better controlled in a longitudinal study. The anticipatory versus consummatory pleasure distinction appears to be useful for the development of new psychosocial interventions, tailored to improve desire in patients suffering from schizophrenia. Major limitations of the study are the small size of patient sample and the under representation of men in the control sample.