首页> 外文期刊>European neuropsychopharmacology: the journal of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology >Chlorpromazine versus every other antipsychotic for schizophrenia: A systematic review and meta-analysis challenging the dogma of equal efficacy of antipsychotic drugs
【24h】

Chlorpromazine versus every other antipsychotic for schizophrenia: A systematic review and meta-analysis challenging the dogma of equal efficacy of antipsychotic drugs

机译:氯丙嗪与其他所有抗精神病药物治疗精神分裂症:一项系统综述和荟萃分析,对抗精神病药物等效功效的教条提出了挑战

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

It is one of the major psychiatric dogmas that the efficacy of all antipsychotic drugs is same. This statement originated from old, narrative reviews on first-generation antipsychotics, but this old literature has never been meta-analysed. We therefore conducted a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials on the efficacy of chlorpromazine versus any other antipsychotic in the treatment of schizophrenia. If the benchmark drug chlorpromazine were significantly more or less effective than other antipsychotics, the notion of equal efficacy would have to be rejected. We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group[U+05F3]s specialized register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychInfo and reference lists of relevant articles. The primary outcome was response to treatment. We also analyzed mean values of schizophrenia rating scales at endpoint and drop-out rates. 128, mostly small, RCTs with 10667 participants were included. Chlorpromazine was compared with 43 other antipsychotics and was more efficacious than four (butaperazine, mepazine, oxypertine and reserpine) and less efficacious than other four antipsychotics (clomacran, clozapine, olanzapine and zotepine) in the primary outcome. There were no statistically significant efficacy differences between chlorpromazine and the remaining 28 antipsychotics. The most important finding was that, due to low numbers of participants (median 50, range 8-692), most comparisons were underpowered. Thus we infer that the old antipsychotic drug literature was inconclusive and the claim for equal efficacy of antipsychotics was never evidence-based. Recent meta-analyses on second-generation antipsychotics were in a better position to address this question and small, but consistent differences between drugs were found.
机译:所有抗精神病药的功效都相同,是主要的精神病学教条之一。该陈述源自对第一代抗精神病药的古老叙事性评论,但从未对荟萃的古老文献进行过荟萃分析。因此,我们对氯丙嗪与任何其他抗精神病药治疗精神分裂症的疗效进行了随机对照试验的荟萃分析。如果基准药物氯丙嗪比其他抗精神病药明显或多或少有效,则必须拒绝具有等效功效的概念。我们搜索了Cochrane精神分裂症小组[U + 05F3]的专业注册簿,MEDLINE,EMBASE,PsychInfo和相关文章的参考列表。主要结果是对治疗的反应。我们还分析了终点和辍学率的精神分裂症评定量表的平均值。其中包括128个(大多数是小型的)RCT,参与者为10667。将氯丙嗪与其他43种抗精神病药进行了比较,在主要结局方面,氯丙嗪的疗效比四种(丁哌嗪,甲哌嗪,奥美拉汀和利血平)要高,而其他四种抗精神病药(氯macran,氯氮平,奥氮平和唑替平)的疗效则差。氯丙嗪与其余28种抗精神病药之间没有统计学显着的疗效差异。最重要的发现是,由于参与者人数较少(中位数50,范围8-692),大多数比较的功能不足。因此,我们推断旧的抗精神病药文献尚无定论,抗精神病药同等效力的主张从来都不是基于证据的。最近对第二代抗精神病药进行的荟萃分析可以更好地解决这一问题,并且发现药物之间的差异很小,但却是一致的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号