scholarly journals Audit of ADHD medication prescription and monitoring in intellectual disability services, Greater Glasgow & Clyde

BJPsych Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (S1) ◽  
pp. S66-S66
Author(s):  
Neha Bansal ◽  
Muzammil Hayat
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Disability ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Physical Health ◽  
Health Monitoring ◽  
Symptom Severity ◽  
Adhd Medication ◽  
Audit Tool ◽  
Medication Prescription ◽  
Ongoing Treatment ◽  
Medication Dosage

AimsStudies have shown that people with intellectual disability (ID) show a greater severity of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms and atypical presentation, as well as having a greater risk of developing comorbidities, such as challenging behaviour, anxiety, tic disorders and sleep problems. It is estimated that 1.5% of patients with ID will have a clinical diagnosis of ADHD.The aim of this audit was to find whether individuals with ID and ADHD, who are prescribed medication for ADHD are adequately monitored and reviewed in accordance with the ADHD medication prescription guidance by NICE and the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych).MethodThis audit looked at ADHD medication prescription for the ID population within Greater Glasgow & Clyde NHS. This is the 6th audit cycle where electronic records (EMIS) were analysed between 28/9/19 to 09/10/20. (The 5th cycle data collection period ended on 28/9/19). We collected data on all patients aged over 18 years.An audit tool was developed to find whether the following were documented; patient demographics, physical health monitoring, symptom severity, medication dosage, side effects, need for ongoing treatment and frequency of review. 100% of patients should have all components on the ADHD audit tool documented, as per NICE/ RCPsych prescription guidance.Result32 patients were identified as being diagnosed with ADHD prescribed medication. One patient was impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic which meant that the required monitoring was not fully carried out. The age ranged from 18 to 56 years. 75% had mild intellectual disability, 19% had moderate and 6% had severe, with no cases of profound intellectual disability. Blood Pressure/pulse was recorded in 84% of patients. Height/weight/ BMI was recorded in 81% of patients. 97% of patients had ADHD symptom severity, medication dosage, side effects, need for ongoing treatment and frequency of review recorded.ConclusionThere is further scope for improvement in the monitoring and documentation of physical health observations, however there was a significant improvement compared to the previous cycle of the audit. Other aspects of monitoring and documentation appear to be recorded in almost 100% of patients. This finding emphasises the challenges of physical health monitoring and compliance in psychiatry as a whole. We need to continue to encourage awareness and education around the physical health risks to our patients, not only due to their comorbidities but also as a result of the psychotropic medications we prescribe them.

scholarly journals Do you mind if I take your blood pressure? Physical health monitoring of children and young people on ADHD medication amidst a pandemic

BJPsych Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (S1) ◽  
pp. S183-S184
Author(s):  
Emma Davies ◽  
Maham Khan ◽  
Claire Jones
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Heart Rate ◽  
Young People ◽  
Physical Health ◽  
Health Monitoring ◽  
Neurodevelopmental Disorder ◽  
Adhd Medication ◽  
Children And Young People ◽  
Nice Guidance ◽  
The Impact

AimsTo establish whether physical health monitoring for CYP on ADHD medication is according to NICE guidance (2018).To determine the impact of COVID-19 pandemic restrictions on physical health monitoring for CYP on ADHD medication.Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common neurodevelopmental disorder, characterised by a persistent pattern of inattention and/or hyperactivity-impulsivity, directly impacting on academic, occupational, or social functioning. It affects between 1-5% of children and young people (CYP) most often presenting in early-mid childhood.Pharmacological treatment can be considered in CYP if certain criteria are met, where licensed medications include methylphenidate, dexamfetamine, lisdexamfetamine, atomoxetine and guanfacine. Stimulant and non-stimulant medications require frequent physical health monitoring due to their side effects including an increase in blood pressure and/or heart rate, loss of appetite, growth restriction and tics.MethodStandards and criteria were derived from the NICE guidance (2018), whilst local trust policies were reviewed, demonstrating discrepancies. Standards were expected to be met for 100% of patients.Electronic patient records were reviewed retrospectively from a representative cohort of CYP reviewed by clinicians in a community CAMHS service during March-November 2020. Data were entered manually into a spreadsheet for evaluation.ResultA total of 27 CYP records were reviewed, average age 13yo, on a range of stimulant/non-stimulant preparations.5 (19%) had height checked every 6 months, with 4 delayed to 7-8 months.For those >10yo, only 5 (19%) had weight checked every 6 months.Only 2 (7%) had their height and weight plotted on a growth chart and reviewed by the healthcare professional responsible for treatment.Just 4 (15%) had heart rate and blood pressure recorded before and after each dose change, whilst similarly only 4 (not the same) had these parameters recorded every 6 months.17 patients were reviewed by telephone/video call, where 5 patients provided physical health parameters (measured at home).ConclusionAcross all parameters, standards are not being met for the required physical health monitoring for CYP on ADHD medication.The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly changed the working conditions for community teams, impacting face to face reviews, creating challenges for physical health monitoring.Our ongoing implementations for change include the use of a proforma for physical health measurements, improving psychoeducation for families, exploring potential barriers with senior colleagues and collaborating with pharmacy colleagues to update local guidelines in accordance with the latest NICE recommendations. We aim to re-audit in June 2021.

scholarly journals Off-label prescribing of quetiapine in south locality crisis teams

BJPsych Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (S1) ◽  
pp. S87-S87
Author(s):  
Mamta Kumari ◽  
Arun Kumar Gupta ◽  
Peter Clarke
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Physical Health ◽  
Health Monitoring ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
General Medical Council ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Medical Council ◽  
Team Members ◽  
Off Label ◽  
Psychotropic Medicines

AimsThe audit was carried out to determine the frequency of off label prescribing of quetiapine and compliance with standards within Trust Policy (UHM PGN 02 PPT PGN 08) – Physical Health Monitoring of Patients Prescribed Antipsychotics and other Psychotropic Medicines, NICE CG178, General Medical Council Ethical Standards and Royal College of Psychiatrists – College Report CR210.The main objectives of the audit were to determine if:Patients have been appropriately informed of off-label status and consent recorded.Alternative licensed treatment first used/ruled out.Appropriate communication on transfer of care.Appropriate physical health monitoring completed.BackgroundQuetiapine is associated with various physical side effects. Patients should be fully informed of the expected risks and benefits of treatment, and the limited evidence base for off-label prescribing.There are additional issues around the transfer of prescribing to primary care.MethodThe sample consisted of 50 consecutive patients selected from the crisis team caseload in the month of December 2018.Data reviewed in this audit were taken from six months period.Records audited were obtained from RiO (electronic records) and prescription charts.Data collection was started in January 2019 and completed in March 2019The audit tool was a dichotomous scale questionnaire based on NICE guidelines.Result4 patients from the sample (8%) were prescribed off-label quetiapine.100% had physical health monitoring completed as per Trust policy.100% off-label indication been clearly documented in notes.100% Consent to treatment was documented.100% had medication reviewed in the previous 6 months.75% had licensed medication used or ruled out before considering off-label quetiapine use25% risks/benefits of treatment were documented as part of a patient discussion.25% had documented evidence that alternative treatment options were discussed.25% had documented evidence of Community consultant/GP consent/agreement was obtained before transfer of prescribing75% had a documented plan for review of quetiapine for treatment efficacy and side effects50% had a documented plan in place for ongoing physical health monitoringConclusionSuggested a wider audit may be required with greater patient numbers and which specifically filters for patients prescribed quetiapine.Audit result has been shared with Crisis team members, Medicines Optimisation Committee and South Locality Quality Standards Committee in the trust.

Establishing a physical health monitoring service for patients on depot antipsychotic medication

2016 ◽  
Vol 33 (S1) ◽  
pp. S564-S564
Author(s):  
M. Gill ◽  
M. McCauley
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Physical Health ◽  
Antipsychotic Medication ◽  
Health Monitoring ◽  
Side Effect ◽  
Blood Test ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Physical Parameters ◽  
Depot Antipsychotic

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.

scholarly journals High dose antipsychotic treatment monitoring audit

BJPsych Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (S1) ◽  
pp. S348-S348
Author(s):  
Jake Scott ◽  
Jose Belda
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Physical Health ◽  
Health Monitoring ◽  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Health Assessment ◽  
Antipsychotic Treatment ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Health Checks ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Multi Disciplinary Team

AimsTo quantify how many patients were prescribed high dose antipsychotic treatment (HDAT) and establish whether guidance for monitoring HDAT was being followed in an Assertive Outreach Team.BackgroundSevere mental health disorders are associated with significant premature mortality, predominantly due to physical health conditions. Antipsychotic medications are associated with side effects, including metabolic syndrome and QT prolongation, which increase the risk of serious physical illness. HDAT is defined as when the total dose of antipsychotics prescribed exceeds 100% of the maximum BNF dose, if each dose is expressed a percentage of its maximum dose. There is limited evidence of clinical benefit with HDAT but an increased risk of side effects. Patients prescribed HDAT should therefore be monitored for side effects and clinical benefit. Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust developed a form specifically for this purpose, to be completed in addition to a physical health assessment.MethodAll patients on caseload were audited using the electronic notes. Current inpatients were excluded, as inpatient HDAT monitoring forms are attached to paper drug charts and therefore were not available for review.ResultA total of 61 patients were audited. Nine were excluded due to being inpatients. 16 were on community treatment orders and 26 were prescribed a long-acting antipsychotic injection. 10 were prescribed clozapine. The median number of medications prescribed was one. Four patients were prescribed HDAT ranging from 117-150% of the maximum BNF dose. Of these four, one had a HDAT form but this was out of date. 39 of 52 (75%) patients audited had had a physical health assessment in the past 12 months. Two of the 13 missing a physical health assessment were on HDAT.ConclusionPhysical health monitoring should be carried out for all patients on antipsychotics, but is particularly important for patients on HDAT. This audit identified a problem in both general physical health checks and HDAT monitoring. On discussion with the multi-disciplinary team a number of barriers to appropriate physical health monitoring were identified. There was a lack of awareness within the multi-disciplinary team that patients were receiving HDAT and regarding the implications for side effects. A reliable system to highlight the need for physical health checks was also missing and the team did not have sufficient equipment to perform the necessary checks. Identifying these barriers should enable improvements in physical health and HDAT monitoring which can be re-audited.

scholarly journals Completed Audit of Physical Health Status of Patients with Severe Mental Illness in a Medium Secure Forensic Psychiatric Rehab Ward

2009 ◽  
Vol 24 (S1) ◽  
pp. 1-1
Author(s):  
M. George ◽  
P. Thakkar ◽  
K. Vasudev ◽  
N. Mitcheson
Keyword(s):  
Health Status ◽  
Physical Health ◽  
Health Monitoring ◽  
Smoking Status ◽  
Physical Health Status ◽  
Medication Regimen ◽  
National Guidelines ◽  
Blood Lipid Profile ◽  
Cholesterol Ratio ◽  
Image Position

Aim:An audit was conducted in September 2006 to determine whether the Physical health monitoring of patients on anti-psychotic medication was concurrent with the national guidelines.This audit done in Dec 07 aimed to ascertain to what extent the recommendations were implemented and followed, thereby completing the audit cycle.Methods:The Audit was conducted in a 15 bedded medium secure forensic rehab ward.As there was a lack of recording of the physical health status a monitoring sheet was introduced in the notes after the first audit. Age, Weight, Height, Smoking status, Blood Pressure, Diabetic Status, Blood Lipid Profile, ECG and the Medication regimen were noted for each of the patient.Results:Conclusion:100% physical health monitoring was achieved and improvements in weight, CV risk, Total/HDL cholesterol ratio was noted 4 cases of significant QT prolongation and another 3 cases of prolactin elevation were detected because of the introduction of monitoring.

Monitoring the physical health of individuals with serious mental illness

2008 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 108-115
Author(s):  
Majella Cahill ◽  
Anne Jackson
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
Mental Health Service ◽  
Physical Health ◽  
Serious Mental Illness ◽  
Health Monitoring ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Psychiatric Service ◽  
Service Users ◽  
Effective Models

AbstractDeveloping effective models of identifying and managing physical ill health amongst mental health service users has become an increasing concern for psychiatric service providers. This article sets out the general professional and Irish statutory obligations to provide physical health monitoring services for individuals with serious mental illness. Review and summary statements are provided in relation to the currently available guidelines on physical health monitoring.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document