Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T03:06:18.288Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

An Audit on the Prescribing of Antipsychotics Among People With Recorded Emotionally Unstable Personality Disorder (EUPD) Within a Community Mental Health Service in Stroud, Gloucestershire

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 July 2023

Amir Palermo*
Affiliation:
Gloucestershire Health and Care NHS Foundation Trust, Stroud, United Kingdom
Claire Dibben
Affiliation:
Gloucestershire Health and Care NHS Foundation Trust, Stroud, United Kingdom
*
*Corresponding author.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Aims

(1)To quantify the prevalence and duration of the prescribing of antipsychotics among people with a record of EUPD, particularly those without a mental health comorbidity that licenses an antipsychotic prescription; (2)To determine whether gender, age, and mental health comorbidities affect the likelihood of being prescribed antipsychotics; (3)To determine whether off-license use of antipsychotics among those with EUPD have ever been reviewed, with the aim of having these prescriptions stopped or reduced.

Methods

Study design: Retrospective cohort study.

Setting: Data sourced from Stroud Recovery's electronic patient record of 287 people. Cohort entry was defined as the date of referral to Stroud Recovery. End of follow-up was the date of audit (20/11/2022).

Primary outcome measures: Prevalence and duration of antipsychotic prescription among people with a record of EUPD within the Stroud Recovery caseload.

Results

Of the 287 people registered with Stroud Recovery, 37 (13%) had a recorded diagnosis of EUPD. 30 (81%) were ever prescribed antipsychotics. Only 6 of these 30 people (20%) have a mental health comorbidity that licenses an antipsychotic prescription (3 with bipolar affective disorder; 2 with severe depression requiring antipsychotic augmentation; 1 with schizoaffective disorder).

The rest belonged to a subgroup of 24 people (80%) with recorded EUPD who were prescribed antipsychotics but with no history of co-morbid illness that licenses their use. This subgroup was predominantly female (75%) and aged 20–29 years (46%). Quetiapine was used in this subgroup the most, followed by olanzapine and aripiprazole. 12 (50%) have had more than one antipsychotic prescribed. None were prescribed for less than 1 week (defined by NICE as short-term use). In fact, the mean duration of antipsychotic prescription in this subgroup was 36.79 months. Only 10 (42%) had these prescriptions reviewed with the aim of having them stopped or reduced. None were offered a routine physical review.

Conclusion

According to NICE guidelines, antipsychotics are not recommended in the treatment of EUPD, not recommended in the treatment of medium to long-term impulsivity and other symptoms of EUPD, and antipsychotics should be reviewed for people with the aim of reducing and stopping unnecessary drug treatment. Contrary to NICE guidelines, in this community mental health service, antipsychotics are frequently prescribed for extended periods to people with recorded EUPD but with no history of a co-morbid illness that licenses their use. An urgent review of clinical practice is warranted, including the effectiveness of such prescribing and the need to monitor for adverse effects, including metabolic complications.

Type
Audit
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NC
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.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Royal College of Psychiatrists

Footnotes

Abstracts were reviewed by the RCPsych Academic Faculty rather than by the standard BJPsych Open peer review process and should not be quoted as peer-reviewed by BJPsych Open in any subsequent publication.

Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.