抗精神病药所致静坐不能的药物疗效:系统评价和网络荟萃分析。

Drug Efficacy in the Treatment of Antipsychotic-Induced Akathisia: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

机构信息

Health Service Research and Quality of Life Center (CEReSS), Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille, Aix-Marseille Université, Marseille, France.

FondaMental Foundation, Creteil, France.

出版信息

JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Mar 4;7(3):e241527. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.1527.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

Antipsychotic-induced akathisia (AIA) occurs in 14% to 35% of patients treated with antipsychotics and is associated with increased suicide and decreased adherence in patients with schizophrenia. However, no comprehensive review and network meta-analysis has been conducted to compare the efficacy of treatments for AIA.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy associated with AIA treatments.

DATA SOURCES

Three databases (MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar) were systematically searched by multiple researchers for double-blind randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing active drugs for the treatment of AIA with placebo or another treatment between May 30 and June 18, 2023.

STUDY SELECTION

Selected studies were RCTs that compared adjunctive drugs for AIA vs placebo or adjunctive treatment in patients treated with antipsychotics fulfilling the criteria for akathisia, RCTs with sample size of 10 patients or more, only trials in which no additional drugs were administered during the study, and RCTs that used a validated akathisia score. Trials with missing data for the main outcome (akathisia score at the end points) were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data extraction and synthesis were performed, estimating standardized mean differences (SMDs) through pairwise and network meta-analysis with a random-effects model. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline was followed.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the severity of akathisia measured by a validated scale at the last available end point.

RESULTS

Fifteen trials involving 492 participants compared 10 treatments with placebo. Mirtazapine (15 mg/d for ≥5 days; SMD, -1.20; 95% CI, -1.83 to -0.58), biperiden (6 mg/d for ≥14 days; SMD, -1.01; 95% CI, -1.69 to -0.34), vitamin B6 (600-1200 mg/d for ≥5 days; SMD, -0.92; 95% CI, -1.57 to -0.26), trazodone (50 mg/d for ≥5 days; SMD, -0.84; 95% CI, -1.54 to -0.14), mianserin (15 mg/d for ≥5 days; SMD, -0.81; 95% CI, -1.44 to -0.19), and propranolol (20 mg/d for ≥6 days; SMD, -0.78; 95% CI, -1.35 to -0.22) were associated with greater efficacy than placebo, with low to moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 34.6%; 95% CI, 0.0%-71.1%). Cyproheptadine, clonazepam, zolmitriptan, and valproate did not yield significant effects. Eight trials were rated as having low risk of bias; 2, moderate risk; and 5, high risk. Sensitivity analyses generally confirmed the results for all drugs except for cyproheptadine and propranolol. No association between effect sizes and psychotic severity was found.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, mirtazapine, biperiden, and vitamin B6 were associated with the greatest efficacy for AIA, with vitamin B6 having the best efficacy and tolerance profile. Trazodone, mianserin, and propranolol appeared as effective alternatives with slightly less favorable efficacy and tolerance profiles. These findings should assist prescribers in selecting an appropriate medication for treating AIA.

摘要

重要性

抗精神病药引起的静坐不能(AIA)在接受抗精神病药治疗的患者中发生率为 14%至 35%,与精神分裂症患者的自杀风险增加和依从性降低有关。然而,尚无综合评价和网络荟萃分析来比较治疗 AIA 的疗效。

目的

比较 AIA 治疗相关的疗效。

数据来源

三名研究人员于 2023 年 5 月 30 日至 6 月 18 日,通过多轮搜索,在 MEDLINE、Web of Science 和 Google Scholar 三个数据库中系统地检索了比较 AIA 治疗中活性药物与安慰剂或另一种治疗方法的双盲随机临床试验(RCT)。

研究选择

入选研究为 RCT,比较了辅助药物治疗 AIA 与安慰剂或辅助治疗,纳入标准为符合静坐不能标准的接受抗精神病药治疗的患者,样本量为 10 例或以上的 RCT,仅研究期间未给予其他药物的 RCT,以及使用经证实的静坐不能评分的 RCT。排除主要结局(终点时静坐不能评分)缺失数据的试验。

数据提取和综合

进行了数据提取和综合,通过两两比较和网络荟萃分析,使用随机效应模型估计标准化均数差(SMD)。遵循了系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南。

主要结果和测量

主要结局是使用经证实的量表在最后一个可获得的终点测量的静坐不能严重程度。

结果

15 项涉及 492 名参与者的试验比较了 10 种治疗方法与安慰剂。米氮平(15mg/d,至少 5 天;SMD,-1.20;95%CI,-1.83 至-0.58)、比哌立登(6mg/d,至少 14 天;SMD,-1.01;95%CI,-1.69 至-0.34)、维生素 B6(600-1200mg/d,至少 5 天;SMD,-0.92;95%CI,-1.57 至-0.26)、曲唑酮(50mg/d,至少 5 天;SMD,-0.84;95%CI,-1.54 至-0.14)、米安色林(15mg/d,至少 5 天;SMD,-0.81;95%CI,-1.44 至-0.19)和普萘洛尔(20mg/d,至少 6 天;SMD,-0.78;95%CI,-1.35 至-0.22)与安慰剂相比,疗效更好,异质性为低至中度(I2=34.6%;95%CI,0.0%-71.1%)。赛庚啶、氯硝西泮、佐米曲坦和丙戊酸钠未产生显著效果。8 项试验被评为低风险;2 项为中度风险;5 项为高风险。敏感性分析一般证实了除赛庚啶和普萘洛尔外,所有药物的结果。未发现效应大小与精神病严重程度之间存在关联。

结论和相关性

在这项系统评价和网络荟萃分析中,米氮平、比哌立登和维生素 B6 与 AIA 的最大疗效相关,其中维生素 B6 的疗效和耐受性最好。曲唑酮、米安色林和普萘洛尔似乎是有效的替代药物,但其疗效和耐受性稍差。这些发现应该有助于临床医生选择合适的药物来治疗 AIA。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b05f/10921255/814cf118eff7/jamanetwopen-e241527-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索