人格障碍的药理学处方和综合用药趋势:自然主义数据的10年横断面分析。

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Flavio Di Leone, Steinn Steingrimsson, Hanne Krage Carlsen, Sophie I Liljedahl, Peter Sand
{"title":"人格障碍的药理学处方和综合用药趋势:自然主义数据的10年横断面分析。","authors":"Flavio Di Leone, Steinn Steingrimsson, Hanne Krage Carlsen, Sophie I Liljedahl, Peter Sand","doi":"10.1186/s12888-025-06716-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The purpose of this study was to examine trends in prescribing practices for individuals diagnosed with personality disorders (PD) over a 10-year period in a major metropolitan area in Sweden. Our aim was to assess the alignment of prescribing patterns with national clinical guidelines.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A register analysis was conducted on 26,520 pharmacological prescriptions from patients' Electronic Health Records (EHRs), documented between January 2011 and December 2020. The study compared the annual proportion of prescriptions across various psychotropic medication classes over time between individuals diagnosed with PD alone and those diagnosed with PD and co-occurring clinical conditions. Additionally, polypharmacy (≥ 3 psychiatric medications) was investigated in both groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The proportion of individuals diagnosed with PD alone who received medication increased significantly over the study period. No significant changes were observed in polypharmacy, which remained prevalent in both groups. In the PD alone group, significant negative trends were observed in prescriptions for antidepressants, mood stabilizers, and benzodiazepine derivatives, while stimulant prescriptions rose significantly. In contrast, non-benzodiazepine sedatives and antipsychotics increased significantly in the group with co-occurring conditions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study indicates mixed adherence to Swedish national prescribing guidelines for PD. While there was alignment with recommendations, such as reduced benzodiazepine use, challenges remain in addressing polypharmacy and the prescribing of medications without clear indications, particularly in individuals without comorbidities. These findings emphasize the need for improved diagnostic accuracy, ongoing clinician education, and the integration of prescribing data with diagnostic and treatment records. Future research should explore prescribing practices across various clinical settings and assess the influence of psychopharmacological trends on prescribing, while also defining polypharmacy in the context of personality disorders to guide clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":9029,"journal":{"name":"BMC Psychiatry","volume":"25 1","pages":"314"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11963506/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Trends in pharmacological prescriptions and polypharmacy for personality disorders: a 10-year cross-sectional analysis of naturalistic data.\",\"authors\":\"Flavio Di Leone, Steinn Steingrimsson, Hanne Krage Carlsen, Sophie I Liljedahl, Peter Sand\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12888-025-06716-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The purpose of this study was to examine trends in prescribing practices for individuals diagnosed with personality disorders (PD) over a 10-year period in a major metropolitan area in Sweden. Our aim was to assess the alignment of prescribing patterns with national clinical guidelines.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A register analysis was conducted on 26,520 pharmacological prescriptions from patients' Electronic Health Records (EHRs), documented between January 2011 and December 2020. The study compared the annual proportion of prescriptions across various psychotropic medication classes over time between individuals diagnosed with PD alone and those diagnosed with PD and co-occurring clinical conditions. Additionally, polypharmacy (≥ 3 psychiatric medications) was investigated in both groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The proportion of individuals diagnosed with PD alone who received medication increased significantly over the study period. No significant changes were observed in polypharmacy, which remained prevalent in both groups. In the PD alone group, significant negative trends were observed in prescriptions for antidepressants, mood stabilizers, and benzodiazepine derivatives, while stimulant prescriptions rose significantly. In contrast, non-benzodiazepine sedatives and antipsychotics increased significantly in the group with co-occurring conditions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study indicates mixed adherence to Swedish national prescribing guidelines for PD. While there was alignment with recommendations, such as reduced benzodiazepine use, challenges remain in addressing polypharmacy and the prescribing of medications without clear indications, particularly in individuals without comorbidities. These findings emphasize the need for improved diagnostic accuracy, ongoing clinician education, and the integration of prescribing data with diagnostic and treatment records. Future research should explore prescribing practices across various clinical settings and assess the influence of psychopharmacological trends on prescribing, while also defining polypharmacy in the context of personality disorders to guide clinical practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9029,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Psychiatry\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"314\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11963506/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-025-06716-4\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-025-06716-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:本研究的目的是研究瑞典一个主要大都市地区10年来诊断为人格障碍(PD)的个体的处方实践趋势。我们的目的是评估处方模式与国家临床指南的一致性。方法:对2011年1月至2020年12月记录的患者电子健康记录(EHRs)中的26,520张药理学处方进行登记分析。该研究比较了单独诊断为PD的个体和诊断为PD并同时发生临床疾病的个体之间各种精神药物类别的年度处方比例。此外,两组均调查了多药(≥3种精神科药物)情况。结果:在研究期间,单独诊断为PD的个体接受药物治疗的比例显著增加。在两组中,多药未见明显变化,仍然普遍存在。在单独的PD组中,抗抑郁药、情绪稳定剂和苯二氮卓类衍生物的处方呈显著的负趋势,而兴奋剂的处方明显增加。相比之下,非苯二氮卓类镇静剂和抗精神病药物在合并疾病的组中显著增加。结论:我们的研究表明对瑞典PD国家处方指南的混合依从性。虽然与建议一致,例如减少苯二氮卓类药物的使用,但在解决多种用药和没有明确适应症的药物处方方面仍然存在挑战,特别是在没有合并症的个体中。这些发现强调需要提高诊断的准确性,对临床医生进行持续的教育,并将处方数据与诊断和治疗记录相结合。未来的研究应探索不同临床环境下的处方实践,评估精神药理学趋势对处方的影响,同时定义人格障碍背景下的多重用药,以指导临床实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Trends in pharmacological prescriptions and polypharmacy for personality disorders: a 10-year cross-sectional analysis of naturalistic data.

Introduction: The purpose of this study was to examine trends in prescribing practices for individuals diagnosed with personality disorders (PD) over a 10-year period in a major metropolitan area in Sweden. Our aim was to assess the alignment of prescribing patterns with national clinical guidelines.

Methods: A register analysis was conducted on 26,520 pharmacological prescriptions from patients' Electronic Health Records (EHRs), documented between January 2011 and December 2020. The study compared the annual proportion of prescriptions across various psychotropic medication classes over time between individuals diagnosed with PD alone and those diagnosed with PD and co-occurring clinical conditions. Additionally, polypharmacy (≥ 3 psychiatric medications) was investigated in both groups.

Results: The proportion of individuals diagnosed with PD alone who received medication increased significantly over the study period. No significant changes were observed in polypharmacy, which remained prevalent in both groups. In the PD alone group, significant negative trends were observed in prescriptions for antidepressants, mood stabilizers, and benzodiazepine derivatives, while stimulant prescriptions rose significantly. In contrast, non-benzodiazepine sedatives and antipsychotics increased significantly in the group with co-occurring conditions.

Conclusion: Our study indicates mixed adherence to Swedish national prescribing guidelines for PD. While there was alignment with recommendations, such as reduced benzodiazepine use, challenges remain in addressing polypharmacy and the prescribing of medications without clear indications, particularly in individuals without comorbidities. These findings emphasize the need for improved diagnostic accuracy, ongoing clinician education, and the integration of prescribing data with diagnostic and treatment records. Future research should explore prescribing practices across various clinical settings and assess the influence of psychopharmacological trends on prescribing, while also defining polypharmacy in the context of personality disorders to guide clinical practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Psychiatry
BMC Psychiatry 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
4.50%
发文量
716
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Psychiatry is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of psychiatric disorders, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信