Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-7pwfn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T20:53:50.608Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

One-year estimate of depot antipsychotic adherence and readmission in Victorian community mental health settings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 June 2014

T Lambert,
A de Castella,
A-n Ong,
J Kulkarni and
B Singh
T Lambert
Affiliation:
OPEN, The University of Melbourne and ORYGEN Research Centre
A de Castella
Affiliation:
Alfred Psychiatric Research Centre, The Alfred and Monash University
A-n Ong
Affiliation:
Northwestern Mental Health
J Kulkarni
Affiliation:
Alfred Psychiatric Research Centre, The Alfred and Monash University
B Singh
Affiliation:
The University of Melbourne, Australia
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Information

Type
Abstracts from ‘Brainwaves’— The Australasian Society for Psychiatric Research Annual Meeting 2006, 6–8 December, Sydney, Australia
Information
Acta Neuropsychiatrica , Volume 18 , Issue 6 , December 2006, pp. 259 - 260
Copyright
Copyright © 2006 Blackwell Munksgaard

Background:

This study aimed to 1) to establish the actual or ‘found’ depot adherence rate in typical community psychiatric settings, 2) to describe the sociode-mographic associations with depot adherence and 3) to investigate the relationship between the degree of depot adherence and admission rate to hospital.

Methods:

Patients treated with depot antipsychot-ics were sampled from CCT settings in two AMHSs in urban Melbourne. Depot adherence was defined as patients receiving their injection ± 7 days from the due injection date. Sociodemographic data were acquired from relevant administrative databases.

Results:

The study finds that there is a high mean adherence rate (93%) and the rate of complete adherence is 54%. Patients' adherence was not related to gender, being subject to a CTO, being of NESB, long durations of illness or time on depot treatment. Twenty-eight per cent were admitted in the study year and admission was significantly inversely proportional to depot adherence. The risks of readmission increase significantly when patients are less than 85% adherent, having a relative risk of readmission of 2.63, and for those with less than 75% adherence, a relative risk of 4.32 (P < 0.01).

Conclusions:

To our knowledge, this is the first study to report on the FDAR in community-treated patients. The finding that below 85% adherence, readmission is significantly more likely suggests that there may be a role for carefully and progressively monitoring depot adherence in community services. Reduction in relapses from enhanced adherence will have clinical, social and economic benefits.