An Innovative Approach to Clinical Communication in Schizophrenia: The Approaches to Schizophrenia Communication Checklists

CNS Spectrums ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 333-338 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sharon G. Dott ◽  
Peter Weiden ◽  
Penelope Hopwood ◽  
A. George Awad ◽  
Jonathan S.E. Hellewell ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTSide effects from antipsychotic medications can have a profound effect on patients' lives and may adversely affect their willingness to comply with treatment. Identification of side effects through improved communication between psychiatrists, other members of the healthcare team, and their patients might increase treatment compliance. The Approaches to Schizophrenia Communication (ASC) Steering Group developed two simple, practical checklists for use in the busy clinical setting. The ASC–Self-Report (ASC-SR) checklist is completed by the patient and comprises a list of the more common or clinically important side effects of antipsychotic treatment. The ASC-Clinic (ASC-C) checklist is completed by both clinician and patient together, being used as the basis for a semi-structured interview. In a multicenter pilot study set up to evaluate the utility of checklists, 86% of patients responding considered the ASC-SR to be useful in communicating their problems to psychiatrists and other members of the healthcare team. All healthcare team respondents found both checklists to be helpful when discussing side effect problems with their patients. Moreover, 41% and 47% of healthcare team respondents reported that the ASC-SR and ASC-C, respectively, had assisted them in identifying side-effect problems not previously acknowledged. Preliminary evaluation of the ASC-SR and ASC-C in this multicenter pilot study suggests that both tools were user-friendly, encouraged communication between patients and healthcare professionals about antipsychotic drug side effects, and could readily integrated into everyday clinical practice.

BJPsych Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (S1) ◽  
pp. S106-S107
Author(s):  
James Sterritt

AimsAntipsychotic drugs frequently produce side-effects which represent common reasons for noncompliance. National guidelines, published by the National Institute of Care and Health Excellence, the Royal College of Psychiatrists, and the Maudsley Prescribing Guidelines in Psychiatry, stipulate that patients prescribed antipsychotic drugs should be reviewed for side-effects on a weekly basis. This completed audit cycle, conducted on a mixed acute general adult psychiatric ward, examined whether patients were being assessed for side-effects of antipsychotic drugs using a standardised, self-reporting scale – the Glasgow Antipsychotic Side-effect Scale (GASS) – as per national guidelines. As identification of side-effects is important in tailoring treatment to improve compliance, auditing monitoring practice was important in realising these outcomes.MethodRetrospectively, 26 inpatients were identified over a two-month period who were prescribed antipsychotic drugs. Their notes were reviewed for documented weekly GASS scores for the duration of antipsychotic treatment. Initial data demonstrated 0% compliance with guidelines, as no patients completed a weekly GASS. The intervention to improve compliance was a training session for ward staff on implementing the GASS. Data were subsequently collected prospectively over three weeks for 15 patients.ResultSeven patients completed the GASS weekly over three weeks, representing 47% compliance. Two patients (13%) completed two forms, three (20%) completed one form, and three (20%) completed no forms. There was a positive correlation between being offered the GASS and completing it – only one patient declined to complete it and was not offered it during the third week. Of the remaining 14 patients, if the GASS was offered there was 100% rate of completion. Staff did not offer the GASS to every patient each week, which accounted for most cases of non-completion. Some patients with pre-existing symptoms of physical illnesses included these on the GASS, which complicated interpretation. Future interventions could include further staff education, and involving a ward pharmacist to review results during medication reviews to optimise treatment compliance, as no medication changes resulted directly from patients completing the GASS.ConclusionCompliance with completing the GASS weekly improved following staff education, identifying the main factor affecting compliance as staff not offering the GASS to patients. Patients generally engaged well with side-effect monitoring, as most completed the GASS when offered. Further staff education may produce even greater compliance with guidelines, and involving pharmacy staff to review GASS scores and inform medication choices may lead to use of the GASS resulting in more tolerable and effective treatment plans.


2005 ◽  
Vol 64 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Mehta ◽  
A. Bhagwanjee ◽  
B. Kubheka ◽  
A. Penchaliah ◽  
R. Jadwat

Aim: The purpose of this pilot study was to investigate  the  assessment,  management  and referral practices of South African optometrists in  the  care  of  patients  with  diabetic  retinop-athy  (DR)  and  to  recommend  strategies  to improve  and  standardize  patient  management as required.  Methods:  The  study  design  incorporated quantitative,  qualitative  and  clinical  measures that were administered to fourteen experienced optometrists from the Durban area. The quan-titative measure, the questionnaire in appendix I, evaluated the optometrists’ management pro-tocols of patients with diabetes mellitus (DM).  These  included  the  optometrists’  referral  and co-management practices, their awareness and usage  of  appropriate  guidelines  in  the  man-agement  and  referral  of  these  patients,  their perceived levels of competence and confidence in their education, levels of service offered to the patients and finally the role of Continuous Professional  Development  (CPD).  This  self-report information was supplemented by a set of clinical measures where the study sample grad-ed levels of DR, chose appropriate management options  and  indicated  prognosis  for  disease progression based on a set of slides presented to  them.  Finally  the  fourteen  optometrists,  as well as two ophthalmologists, were interviewed using tailored, semi-structured interview sched-ules. These interviews were used to elaborate and corroborate information obtained from the other two research approaches.  Results:  Descriptive  analysis  was  used  to analyse  the  data  from  the  quantitative  and clinical  measures,  whilst  the  interviews  were analysed  thematically.  Although  86%  of  the sample routinely screened for ocular manifesta-tions of DM, there was no standardization in the criteria used by the fourteen optometrists. Only  15%  of  the  sample  reportedly  assessed their  patients  using  dilated  fundus  examina-tions  (DFE),  which  is  the  internationally  rec-ommended standard of care. The results of the clinical measures indicated that there was a lack of standardization in the management and refer-ral of patients with DR by the study sample, contrary  to  their  own  levels  of  confidence  in their  educational  competencies  regarding  DR and their perception of the level of service that they  offered  to  their  patients.  The  interviews with the optometrists provided crucial insights into this lack of standardised care of patients with DR, with the ophthalmologists confirming the  urgent  need  for  CPD  aimed  at  enhancing clinical  skills  and  ensuring  standardization  in the  management  and  referral  of  patients  with DR.  This finding was particularly relevant for co-management models.Conclusion: This  pilot  study  indicates  that the  performance  of  the  optometrists  (albeit  a relatively small group) in the assessment, man-agement and referral of patients with DR was inconsistent  and  not  in  keeping  with  interna-tionally recommended guidelines. It is recom-mended  that  CPD  programmes  focus  on  the improvement of clinical skills and on the imple-mentation of existing standardised management protocols  for  patients  with  DR.  This  should result in improved patient care, patient confi-dence and loyalty with regard to care received, efficient and effective models of management and  co-management  and  decreased  costs  to patients and the health care system.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 3402-3402 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lori E. Crosby ◽  
Francis J Real ◽  
Bradley Cruse ◽  
David Davis ◽  
Melissa Klein ◽  
...  

Background: Although hydroxyurea (HU) is an effective disease modifying treatment for sickle cell disease (SCD), uptake remains low in pediatric populations in part due to parental concerns such as side-effects and safety. NHLBI Guidelines recommend shared decision making for HU initiation to elicit family preferences and values; however, clinicians lack specific training. A HU shared decision-making (H-SDM) toolkit was developed to facilitate such discussions (NCT03442114). It includes: 1) decision aids to support parents (brochure, booklet, video narratives, and an in-visit issue card [featuring issues parents reported as key to decision-making about HU]); 2) quality improvement tools to monitor shared decision-making performance; and 3) a curriculum to train clinicians in advanced communication skills to engage parents in shared decision-making. This abstract describes the development and preliminary evaluation of the virtual reality (VR) component of the clinician curriculum. Objectives: The goals are to: 1) describe the development of a VR simulation for training clinicians in advanced communication skills, and 2) present preliminary data about its tolerability, acceptability, and impact. Methods: Immersive VR simulations administered via a VR headset were created. The VR environment was designed to replicate a patient room, and graphical character representatives (avatars) of parents and patients were designed based on common demographics of patients with SCD (Figure 1). During simulations, the provider verbally counseled the avatars around HU initiation with avatars' verbal and non-verbal responses matched appropriately. The H-SDM in-visit issue card was incorporated into the virtual environment to reinforce practice with this tool. The VR curriculum was piloted for initial acceptability with parents of a child with SCD and clinicians at a children's hospital. Evaluation: Hematology providers participated in the workshop training that included information on facilitating shared decision-making with subsequent deliberate practice of skills through VR simulations. Each provider completed at least one VR simulation. The view through the VR headset was displayed on to a projector screen so others could view the virtual interaction. Debriefing occurred regarding use of communication skills and utilization of the issue card. To assess tolerability, providers reported side effects related to participation. To assess acceptability, providers completed a modified version of the Spatial Presence Questionnaire and described their experience. Impact was assessed by self-report on a retrospective pre-post survey of confidence in specific communication skills using a 5-point scale (from not confident at all to very confident). Differences in confidence were assessed using Wilcoxon Signed-ranks tests. Results: Nine providers (5 pediatric hematologists and 4 nurse practitioners at 3 children's hospitals) participated. Tolerability: The VR experience was well tolerated with most providers reporting no side effects (Table 1). Acceptability: All providers agreed or strongly agreed that the VR experience captured their senses and that they felt physically present in the VR environment. Providers described the experience as "enjoyable", "immersive", and "fun". One provider noted, "It (the VR simulation) put me in clinic to experience what it felt like to discuss HU and use the tool." Impact: Providers' self-reported confidence significantly improved after VR simulations on 4 of 5 communication skills: confirming understanding, Z =1.98, p = .05, r = .44, eliciting parent concerns/values, Z = 2.22, p = .03, r = .50, using an elicit-provide-elicit approach, Z =1.8, p = .02, r = .50, minimizing medical jargon, Z = 1.8, p = .07, r = .40, and using open-ended questions, Z =1.98, p = .05, r = .44. Median scores changed by one-point for all responses and effects were medium to large (see Figure 2). Discussion: The VR curriculum was rated as immersive, realistic, and well-tolerated. Providers endorsed it as a desirable training method. Self-report of confidence in shared decision making-related communication skills improved following completion of VR simulation. Thus, initial data support that VR may be an effective method for educating providers to engage parents in shared decision making for HU. Disclosures Quinn: Amgen: Other: Research Support; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.


1980 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 319-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert W. Downing ◽  
Karl Rickels

The Irritability, Indirect Hostility, Verbal Hostility, and Resentment scales from the Buss-Durkee Hostility Inventory, along with a newly constructed scale intended as a self-report measure of Hostility Conflict, were administered to 84 non-psychotic, primarily anxious psychiatric outpatients receiving an active anxiolytic and participating in one of several 4-wk. double-blind drug trials. Patients who complained of one or more side effects after 2 wk. of treatment were classified as side reactors; the remaining patients, as non-side reactors. Compared to non-side reactors, the side reactors obtained higher hostility conflict scores and lower scores on the Irritability and Indirect Hostility scales. Also, the relationship between side effect status and hostility conflict was stronger in those patients who obtained higher scores on the Irritability, Indirect Hostility, and Verbal Hostility scales and among patients obtaining lower scores on the Resentment scale. Findings were regarded as providing partial replication of and further verification of earlier results.


2017 ◽  
Vol 47 (13) ◽  
pp. 2369-2378 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Wykes ◽  
J. Evans ◽  
C. Paton ◽  
T. R. E. Barnes ◽  
D. Taylor ◽  
...  

BackgroundCapturing service users’ perspectives can highlight additional and different concerns to those of clinicians, but there are no up to date, self-report psychometrically sound measures of side effects of antipsychotic medications.AimTo develop a psychometrically sound measure to identify antipsychotic side effects important to service users, the Maudsley Side Effects (MSE) measure.MethodAn initial item bank was subjected to a Delphi exercise (n = 9) with psychiatrists and pharmacists, followed by service user focus groups and expert panels (n = 15) to determine item relevance and language. Feasibility and comprehensive psychometric properties were established in two samples (N43 and N50). We investigated whether we could predict the three most important side effects for individuals from their frequency, severity and life impact.ResultsMSE is a 53-item measure with good reliability and validity. Poorer mental and physical health, but not psychotic symptoms, was related to side-effect burden. Seventy-nine percent of items were chosen as one of the three most important effects. Severity, impact and distress only predicted ‘putting on weight’ which was more distressing, more severe and had more life impact in those for whom it was most important.ConclusionsMSE is a self-report questionnaire that identifies reliably the side-effect burden as experienced by patients. Identifying key side effects important to patients can act as a starting point for joint decision making on the type and the dose of medication.


2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (8) ◽  
pp. 820-828
Author(s):  
Marlene Schouby Bock ◽  
Oona Nørgaard Van Achter ◽  
David Dines ◽  
Maria Simonsen Speed ◽  
Christoph U Correll ◽  
...  

Background: Antipsychotics are key for the treatment of psychotic and several non-psychotic disorders. Unfortunately, antipsychotic medications are associated with side effects, which may reduce quality of life and treatment adherence. Therefore, regular screening of antipsychotic side effects is essential. The Glasgow Antipsychotic Side-effect Scale is a patient self-report scale developed for this purpose. However, the Glasgow Antipsychotic Side-effect Scale has only been validated against another self-report side effect measure, which is suboptimal. Objective: We aimed to validate the Glasgow Antipsychotic Side-effect Scale using the clinician-rated Udvalg for Kliniske Undersøgelser side-effect rating scale as the gold standard reference. Results: 81 antipsychotic-treated outpatients with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders (age = 42±13 years; males = 43%, schizophrenia = 77%, illness duration: median = 11 years) completed the Glasgow Antipsychotic Side-effect Scale and were subsequently scored on the Udvalg for Kliniske Undersøgelser by trained raters. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value were calculated for paired Glasgow Antipsychotic Side-effect Scale and Udvalg for Kliniske Undersøgelser items. Sensitivity of Glasgow Antipsychotic Side-effect Scale items ranged from 33–96%, with 19 (86%) having >75% sensitivity. Lowest sensitivity emerged for “nocturnal enuresis” (33%), “galactorrhea” (50%) and “hyperkinesia” 14–99%, with 14 items (64%) having >75% specificity, being lowest for “asthenia” (14%), “polyuria/polydipsia” (35%), “sedation” (41%), “akathisia” (53%), “dystonia” (65%), “hyperkinesia” (68%), “hypokinesia” (70%) and “accommodation” (70%). Positive predictive value ranged from 7–85%, with six items (27%) having a positive predictive value >75%. Negative predictive value ranged from 40–98%, with 21 items (95%) having a negative predictive value >75%. The mean time to complete the Glasgow Antipsychotic Side-effect Scale was 4±2 minutes. Conclusion: The Glasgow Antipsychotic Side-effect Scale demonstrated satisfactory validity as a self-rated tool for antipsychotic side effects and may aid measurement-based care and decision-making.


2016 ◽  
Vol 33 (S1) ◽  
pp. S564-S564
Author(s):  
M. Gill ◽  
M. McCauley

IntroductionPatients with major mental illness are recognised to be at risk of premature death for a multitude of reasons. Those with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder are at highest risk.ObjectivesInternational best practice recommends monitoring of blood tests, physical parameters such as weight, BMI, waist circumference and blood pressure, and side effects of patients prescribed antipsychotic medication. A clinic was established to target these interventions.AimsThis initiative aimed to improve the physical health monitoring of patients prescribed depot antipsychotic medication in a catchment area of approximately 36,000 in Ireland.MethodsA twice-yearly, multidisciplinary monitoring clinic was established. A protocol was drawn up, following a literature review and inspection of current international guidelines, and a proforma assisted as an aide-mémoire. A self-report questionnaire, the Glasgow Antipsychotic Side Effect Scale, was used to enquire about side effects.ResultsEvaluation took place in descriptive form with audit used to examine outcomes. Full blood test monitoring improved from 9% of patients to 61% in one year, with 78% of patients having had at least one blood test recorded. Prior to the clinic's establishment, only one patient had had any physical parameters recorded, but this improved to 96% recorded after the clinics were run. Side effect documentation also improved.ConclusionsThe clinic was well-received and led to improved teamwork. Future recommendations include organising the clinic so as to include simultaneous blood testing. A similar project is being planned to target all patients attending who are prescribed antipsychotic medication.Disclosure of interestThe authors have not supplied their declaration of competing interest.


2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-100
Author(s):  
Nicholas Norman Adams

Newer antidepressant drugs are frequently cited as having reduced side effect profiles to that of their older counterparts. However, recent studies have begun to dispute this claim, citing selective sampling, short clinical trials, and clinical trial environments as influencing reported outcomes. At present, little research on antidepressant side effects draws on RWD (Real-World Data). Despite this, interest in examining RWD samples for antidepressant drug side effects is increasing as of 2020. The reported study asked a random sample of 300+ individuals taking a variety of different antidepressant medications to complete online drug side effect self-report scales with previously high validity. Newer antidepressants belonging to the atypical antidepressant drug class were reported as having only slightly reduced side effects of weight gain compared with older SSRI-class medications. No reduced side effects of increased depression, anxiety, sexual dysfunction (SD), sleepiness, or suicidal ideation (SI) were found for the newer atypical-class medications vs older SSRI-class agents. Medication adherence did not differ significantly between SSRI and atypical classes. No evidence for reduced side effects was found for newer SSRI and atypical antidepressants vs older same-class drugs when comparing six new and old medications drawn from atypical and SSRI classes. However, atypical antidepressants were associated with increased use of adjunct medications to bolster primary treatment.


2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 260-267 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Louise Tveter ◽  
Trine Lise Bakken ◽  
Jørgen G. Bramness ◽  
Jan Ivar Røssberg

Purpose – Patients with intellectual disabilities (ID) and additional psychiatric disorders are often treated with psychotropic medication. However, examinations of side effects among these patients are scarce. The purpose of this pilot study is to examine the most frequently used side effect scale, UKU Side Effect Rating Scale (UKU-SERS), in this patient population. Design/methodology/approach – The aim of the present study is to explore whether the UKU-SERS is feasible for patients with ID. The UKU-SERS consists originally of 48 items, measuring side effects of psychotropic medication. In the study, UKU-SERS was used to score a group of 13 adults with ID admitted to a specialised inpatient psychiatric unit. First, an expert panel of seven psychiatrists and five psychiatric nurses independently evaluated the UKU-SERS and decided which items they considered possible to score after observation alone. Second, a total of 26 staff members, based on observation, scored the 13 patients on the ward. These results were used as the basis for recommending items from UKU-SERS to be used. Items scored differently by the two groups were examined more thoroughly. Findings – The expert panel and the ward staff agreed on 24 of the original 48 UKU-SERS items. The other 24 items were examined more thoroughly based on clinical meaningfulness. Consequently, 11 more items were included despite disagreement in the scorer groups. As expected, items that are based on observations seem more feasible than items based on the patients’ subjective experiences. Originality/value – The revised checklist comprises 35 items and seems applicable for further research and for use in clinical settings for this patient population. It is possible to observe important side effects using the UKU Side Effect Scale, but adjustment of the scale is desirable to make it more appropriate for the specific purpose and target group.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document