Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T08:41:47.506Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The use of antipsychotic polypharmacy at Ravenswood House Medium Secure Unit: the extent of use and reporting of outcomes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 June 2021

Laura Cherrington*
Affiliation:
Ravenswood House Medium Secure Unit
Hari Patel
Affiliation:
Ravenswood House Medium Secure Unit
*
*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

To evaluate the use of antipsychotic polypharmacy in Ravenswood House Medium Secure Hospital. We also aimed to review the reporting of the outcomes of their use.

Background

The use of antipsychotic polypharmacy (APP) continues to be practised within forensic psychiatric inpatient settings yet there is a lack of robust evidence for the benefits of doing so. The practice is also associated with the use of higher total antipsychotic doses beyond the recommended BNF maximum. Such prescribing is associated with an increased side effect burden. Doctors have a duty to justify the ongoing use of antipsychotic polypharmacy and to avoid potentially ineffective and/or harmful use.

Method

A cross-sectional review of the medication cards for 51 in-patients at Ravenswood House Hospital was completed. Demographic data and data pertaining to diagnoses and medication was also gathered from the electronic patient records.

Result

23 patients (45%) in Ravenswood House Hospital were prescribed antipsychotic polypharmacy. 87% of those prescribed antipsychotic polypharmacy had a primary diagnosis of either schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. 19 patients (37%) had two regular antipsychotics prescribed. 74% of these prescriptions were above the recommended BNF maximum. 62% were also prescribed a regular benzodiazepine. The vast majority of indications documented for APP were chronic behavioural disturbance and treatment resistant schizophrenia. The majority of these patients were on a T3. There was a significant under reporting of the rationale of prescribing APP. It could be surmised that at least 11 combinations were in part to mitigate side effects, but only 3 had this documented. There was also a lack of documentation or use of rating scales regarding the clinical outcomes and side effects of APP.

Conclusion

Prescription of antipsychotic polypharmacy is an important issue in secure forensic hospital settings. The lack of clear documentation of clinical effectiveness and side effect burden remains a concern. Wider study is required to establish the benefits of such prescribing to justify its ongoing use.

Type
Service Evaluation
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Royal College of Psychiatrists
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.