Perceptions on efficacy and side effects of conventional depot antipsychotics (CDA) and atypical depot antipsychotics (ADA): Psychiatrists versus patients in Hong Kong

Abstract

Objectives. We compared the satisfaction level of psychiatrists and psychiatric patients towards conventional (CDA) and atypical (ADA) depot antipsychotics on symptom management, role functioning, and side effects. Method. Patients from an out-patient clinic of a public hospital and psychiatrists from public hospitals participated in the survey in 2007–2008. A total of 153 patients were interviewed by a tailor-made questionnaire and 72 psychiatrists self-administered a similar questionnaire. Results. Both groups shared similar attitudes towards clinical effectiveness and treatment efficacy of ADA and CDA. More patients were ambivalent towards relapse prevention of CDA than psychiatrists (30.7 vs. 16.7%, P<0.044) and three quarters of psychiatrists believed that ADA are associated with less side effects. More than half of the patients showed negative attitudes towards the effectiveness of CDA on improving quality of life (52.40%), work (57.50%), and recreation (55.50%). Psychiatrists were more aware of the limitation of CDA and severity of side effects of CDA. They did not, however, seem to incorporate patients' opinions and research findings into their clinical practice. Conclusion. Evidence-based practice and shared decision-making model between clinicians and mental patients should be advocated. More investigations should be devoted to examine the efficacy of ADA as the alternative to CDA.

Key Words::

• Conventional depot antipsychotics
• treatment efficacy
• side effects
• antipsychotics (ADA)
• functional performance

Acknowledgement

The authors thank Dr T.L. Lo, Dr Patrick Kwong, and the West Kowloon Psychiatric Center of the Kwai Chung Hospital of Hong Kong for the participation and assistance with patient recruitment.

Statement of interest

This study received donation from the Janssen Pharmaceutica, Hong Kong. The authors and the acknowledged individuals have had no additional financial or other relationship relevant to the subject of this article.