A new study rethinks the treatment of schizophrenia and proves that patients would benefit from fewer antipsychotics.

Schizophrenia is a mental health disease that affects more than two million people in the United States alone. The condition is often treated with heavy, dazing antipsychotic drugs.

The medication stops the symptoms of schizophrenia but leaves patients with a slew of side effects, such as severe weight gain or debilitating tremors.

A new federally-funded study calls for a different way to treat schizophrenia, focusing on providing less medication and more options for therapy.

The Study

Researchers found that talk therapy benefited patients who were experiencing the first schizophrenic episode.
Image: The Daily Beast

The research was published in the American Journal of Psychiatry after a series of in-depth trials. The study suggests that patients who took small doses of antipsychotics combined with one-on-one talk therapy and family support saw better results than those who were overprescribed and sedated.

Funded by the National Institute of Mental Health, the study found that patients who received active therapy after the first schizophrenic episode did much better in recovery.

“I’m very favorably impressed they were able to pull this study off so successfully, and it clearly shows the importance of early intervention,” said Dr. William T. Carpenter, a professor of psychiatry at the University of Maryland School of Medicine.

The study is based on successful programs that have been used in Australia and Scandinavia for decades. This is the first real-world trial of this method.

The study was conducted at 34 community mental health centers in 21 states randomly assigned either drugs, therapeutic treatment or both. It included 404 people with first-episode psychosis in their late teens or 20s, half of which received the new approach. The other half of patients received antipsychotic care.

The patients were monitored with standardized checklists that rate symptom severity and quality of life, taking into account the ability to work and get along with family. Patients in the combined program had more symptom relief and functioned better.

The medicated group experienced side effects including weight gain, extreme drowsiness or emotional numbing. Studies show that three-quarters of people prescribed antipsychotics stop taking them within a year and a half.

“As for medications, I have had every side effect out there, from chills and shakes to lockjaw and lactation,” said a 20-year-old trial participant named Maggie. Maggie benefited from the newer approach and is now attending nursing school.

Medications were still used during treatments, but doses were kept at a minimum to keep side effects at bay. The therapy package included help with work and school decisions and increased education for family members. The final component is one-on-one talk therapy, in which the doctors help the patient build social relationships, reduce substance use and manage the symptoms.

“One way to think about it is, if you look at the people who did the best — those we caught earliest after their first episode — their improvement by the end was easily noticeable by friends and family,” Dr. Kane said.

A Change In Mental Health Reform

Regulators are attempting to provide funding for combined-treatment programs that employ active therapy and low doses of medication.
Image: Huffington Post

Mass shootings related to mental illness continue to increase, and Congress is currently deciding on reforms that will help combat episodic violence.

In its guidelines, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services strongly agreed with the combined therapy approach. The reform bills now “mention the study by name,” said Dr. Robert K. Heinssen, the director of services and intervention research at the National Institute of Mental Health.

Congress awarded $25 million to states to fund early intervention mental health programs in 2014. Dr. Heinssen told the New York Times that 32 states have begun using those grants to fund combined-treatment services.

Critics believe that the current methods used to treat schizophrenia are ineffective, especially in the onset of psychosis. The early stages of the disease usually occur in the late teens or early 20s. The hope is that the study will set a new standard for care.

Dr. Kenneth Duckworth, medical director for the National Alliance on Mental Illness, an advocacy group, said the study was “a game-changer for the field” because it chooses a therapeutic method based on the stage of the disease.

The post New Approach To Treating Schizophrenia Suggests Fewer Prescriptions appeared first on Citizens Report.

After reevaluating a study that was more than a decade old, researchers discovered the original data backing the use of the antidepressant Paxil in young people was incorrect.

The reanalysis of the 2001 study that led regulators to believe Paxil should be approved for youth has proven the antidepressant is not actually safe and effective for teenagers.

Critics of the original study are using the error to promote a widespread revamping of scientific self-examination and peer reanalysis.

The Study Revisited

It was later discovered by researchers that Paxil is dangerous for teens and young adults suffering from depression.
Image: Share Care

Dr. Martin Keller of Brown University spearheaded the original study, which included three groups of 90 adolescents throughout eight weeks. One group took Paxil, another took a  placebo and the third group took imipramine, which is an older generic drug for depression.

The group taking Paxil did not outdo the other groups in a standard depression questionnaire, but the drug proved to be more successful in “secondary” measures. Managing certain scales of mood problems was one of the successful areas, the authors reported.

The study was published in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, but many believed that it was unconvincing. Critics who disapproved of the study results said that serious side effects had been played down.

Drug manufacturers began testing antidepressants in young people in the 1990s. These trials are difficult because an estimated one-third of participants is likely to improve on their own. Measuring improvement and labeling side effects are tricky, as each word can play into the perception of a drug.

The 2001 study is part of a long-standing dispute between researchers testing the safety of antidepressants for teens and young adults. In the 2000s, the antidepressant wars subsided with warning labels of Paxil and drugs in its class. The labels included a potential risk of suicide risk for children, adolescents and young adults. However, these drugs are considered safer and more effective for many adults over 25 who have been diagnosed with depression.

The study is still supported by the drug manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline. The drug’s manufacturer submitted the results to federal regulators, who decided that Paxil was going to be approved for use in adolescents.

The manufacturer acted based on scientific conclusions made at the time but is working to incorporate data from the new analysis into the regulation of the drug.

GlaxoSmithKline willingly allowed researchers to access the data, claiming they have engaged in “an unprecedented level of data sharing that speaks to our absolute commitment to transparency.”

Longtime critics of the original study played a role in reanalyzing the data, which took almost a year to complete. The researchers reread summaries, internal trial reports and patient-level data, which included detailed descriptions of how each patient responded to original trials.

In the fourteen years after the study was released, Paxil and other antidepressants have been associated with violence and suicide. But there are no clear statistics depicting this trend.

It is unclear what factors, in conjunction with psychiatric drugs, caused violent reactions, so it’s difficult for health professionals to determine who is at risk.

Dr. Keller and his co-authors disagree with the reassessment of the original study, saying that, “In summary, to describe our trial as ‘misreported’ is pejorative and wrong.”

A New Era Of Reanalysis

The discovery has prompted a discussion on a new trend in scientific publishing that would allow for multiple interpretations in one journal. 
Image: Neusentis

The study led to a surge in antidepressants prescribed to adolescents, increasing by 36 percent between 2002 and 2003. It slowed when regulators added black-box warnings to labels.

By reanalyzing a study that is more than a decade old, scientists are starting a new trend that could yield greater scientific confirmations and ease for patients. Experts cite a new era of scientific publishing, which would allow journals to post additional interpretations of the same study.

Scientific self-examination is becoming more common. Retractions are occurring more frequently than ever before, and fraud has shown just how important it is to replicate results. In fact, when researchers analyzed a sample of psychology papers, only half were correct. This means that reexamination is more important than ever.

The authors of the renewed study illustrate that the errors which occurred in the Paxil study are popping up in other areas of research. Their goal is to make the reanalysis available to scientists in clinical medicine to allow for additional perspectives on the results.

The post Study Reanalysis Shows Antidepressant Is Harmful For Teens appeared first on Citizens Report.

A recent poll from the Kaiser Family Foundation shows that Americans want pharmaceutical companies to lower drug prices. The poll gathers public opinion on pharmaceutical companies and options for cost reduction.

Hepatitis C is a blood-borne virus that infects, damages and causes cancer in the liver. But the good news is that a cure does exist.

The bad news is the pharmaceutical manufacturer of the Hep C treatment,  called Sovaldi, is charging $1,000 per pill.

About half of Americans report using prescription drugs. According to a new poll, Americans need these drugs and are fed up the with excessive, unfair pricing that runs rampant in the nation’s health care industry.

Unreasonable Prices From An Unlikable Industry

Polling shows the American pharmaceutical industry is the least popular service group because drug companies put profits over people.
Via: Conscious Life News

Health maintenance will always be a necessity, and so will the American pharmaceutical industry. Pharmaceuticals have the power to treat and cure illnesses that range from mild to serious, which means that the companies manufacturing the drugs have leverage to keep prices high.

But Americans are not oblivious. In fact, most are aware that pharmaceutical prices are much higher than they should be. In August, the Kaiser Family Foundation conducted a poll that found 72 percent think drug prices are unreasonable.

Out of the group that believes the cost of drugs should be lowered, 77 percent are currently taking pharmaceuticals. But 66 percent who aren’t using prescription drugs are also in agreement.

In addition, 3 out of 4 Americans believe they’re paying higher prices in the United States than they would in Canada, Mexico and Western Europe for the same prescription drugs. Going further, 72 percent of Americans believe Canada should be allowed to import prescription drugs to the United States. Americans want their drugs, and they want them at a fair price.

The polling shows that Americans are aware that pharmaceutical companies provide an important service. But that doesn’t mean the public has to like them.

Pharmaceutical companies are the least liked service group, falling below doctors, food manufacturers, banks and airlines. Fewer than half of the public sees these companies as positive. Only 42 percent of Americans have a favorable view of drug companies, in addition to the fact that 74 percent believe pharmaceutical companies put profits before people.

However, 62 percent of Americans believe that drug companies play a pivotal role in bettering people’s lives.

There has to be a way to create balance between the consumer and the producer.

Potential Ways To Lower Drug Costs

One proposed idea for lowering drug costs would be to allow medicare representatives to negotiate prices with pharmaceutical companies. 83 percent of Americans are in agreement with this option.
Via: KATV

As the presidential election draws near, candidates are speaking out about their opinions on prescription drug prices. Representatives from different political parties are in favor of lowering drug costs, but the way they plan to do it differs by partisan affiliation.

Republicans favor allowing market competition to regulate drug prices, whereas Democrats would prefer to look to the federal government for regulation. The public leans toward market competition, but only by 51 percent or a little more than half.

A few different strategies were included in the poll to introduce possible solutions and gather public attitudes on the current price reduction options. About 86 percent of Americans would like drug companies to provide information to consumers about how they set their prices, which would help to uncover the reasons why they’re so high. If there was an explanation as to why the drugs are so costly, working toward ways to lower the cost would be easier.

The poll addresses that it’s more difficult for sick and lower income individuals to afford pharmaceuticals. To combat that, more than 7 out of 10 people want to put price restrictions on expensive but life-saving drugs used for sicknesses like hepatitis or cancer.

In addition, 83 percent of Americans would like the federal government to negotiate lowered prices for people on Medicare. Allowing cost negotiations with Medicare is supported by the majority of both Republicans and Democrats, which means that it will be a likely and unarguable policy move.

Another option for lowering drug costs would be initiating a system of price choice that would be similar to the one already in place. People would be encouraged to buy cheaper drugs, but would have to pay more if they chose a similar, more expensive version. Only 48 percent of people are in favor of this option, which may be because it is similar to the generic medication options already offered. However, presidential candidate and Senator Bernie Sanders has been highlighting the rising price of generic drugs in his campaign.

Pharmaceutical companies aren’t looking forward to pricing restrictions, claiming that a more regulated marketplace would place limits the amount of new drug discoveries and sponsorships. But more affordable drugs would benefit the public as a whole.

Pharmaceutical companies should repeat this mantra: people over profits.

The post American Majority Disagrees With High-Priced Pharmaceuticals appeared first on Citizens Report.

Alexis Benter

Imagine the very medicine that is meant to maintain and restore health by preventing certain illnesses is found to do the exact opposite? Well, a recent study released by the Group Health Research Institute in Seattle has found just that.

“Our study is the first to address whether oral anticholinergic medications affect the risk of pneumonia in older people,” says senior author Dr. Sascha Dublin, an associate investigator at the institute.

Anticholinergic drugs block the neurotransmitter acetylcholine responsible for involuntary movement of smooth muscles. They are used for conditions such as allergies (e.g. Benadryl), overactive bladder (e.g. Ditropan) and depression (e.g. Doxepin).

The study shows that there is an increased health risk of pneumonia associated with the use of these medications.

“This is important because so many older people use these medications, and pneumonia is such a common cause of illness and death in this age group,” Dublin adds.

What is Pneumonia?

Pneumonia is an inflammation of the lung affecting the alveoli (microscopic air sacs responsible for gas exchange). Some of the most common symptoms associated with the illness include headaches, excessive sweating of the hands and a sharp chest pain that gets increasingly worse with each deep breath or cough.

Although pneumonia is usually caused by infection from a virus or bacteria, it is also, although less commonly, caused by drugs.

The Connection:

The research involved more than 1,000 patients with pneumonia (ages 65 to 94), and another group of over 2,000 people without pneumonia who were matched by age and gender.

The true cause of why anticholinergic medications raise the risk of the illness may be related to the possibility that through sedation and altered mental status, breathing problems and lung infections increase (according to the study by Group Health).

However, it is important to note that the study did not lead to a direct cause-and-effect relationship between use of the drug(s) and pneumonia, but rather an association.

The post Medication Causes… Pneumonia? appeared first on Citizens Report.