|
The Cochrane Collaboration
Cochrane Reviews |
| Explore | New + Updated | Other languages |
|
|
|
Depot pipotiazine palmitate and undecylenate for schizophreniaDinesh M, David A, Quraishi SN SummaryDepot pipotiazine palmitate and undecylenate for schizophreniaWe undertook this review to determine the effects of pipotiazine palmitate for schizophrenia in comparison to placebo, other oral antipsychotics and other depot antipsychotics. We included results of 12 medium term trials, two long term trials, three short term trials and one trial that looked at immediate effects. We found that depot pipotiazine is effective for the treatment of schizophrenia, but overall was similar in effect to other depots and oral typical antipsychotic drugs.
This is a Cochrane review abstract and plain language summary, prepared and maintained by The Cochrane Collaboration, currently published in The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009 Issue 4, Copyright © 2009 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.. The full text of the review is available in The Cochrane Library (ISSN 1464-780X).
This version first published online:
July 26. 1999 AbstractBackgroundAntipsychotic drugs are usually given orally but compliance may be problematic. The development of depot injections in the 1960s gave rise to their extensive use as a means of long-term maintenance treatment. Pipotiazine palmitate is a depot from the phenothiazine family of antipsychotic drugs. ObjectivesTo assess the clinical, social and economic effects of depot pipotiazine palmitate and undecylenate compared with placebo, oral antipsychotics and other depot antipsychotic preparations for people with schizophrenia. Search strategyFor this update we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register (June 2003). We also inspected references of all identified trials for more studies and contacted relevant industries. Selection criteriaWe included all randomised clinical trials comparing depot pipotiazine palmitate and undecylenate to oral antipsychotics or other depot preparations for people with schizophrenia. Data collection and analysisWe reliably selected, quality rated and independently extracted data from relevant studies. We calculated the random effects relative risk (RR), the 95% confidence intervals (CI) and, where possible the number needed to treat (NNT) on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, we calculated weighted mean differences (WMD). We only presented scale data for those tools that had attained pre-specified levels of quality. Main resultsWhen pipotiazine palmitate was compared with 'standard' oral antipsychotic no differences were found for outcomes of global impression (n=53, 1 RCT, RR 2.57, CI 0.8 to 8.6), relapse (n=124, 1 RCT, RR 1.55 CI 0.76 to 3.2), study attrition (n=219, 3 RCTs, RR 1.37 CI 0.8 to 2.4) and behaviour (n=124, 1 RCT, WMD 4.65, CI -1.1 to 10.4). There was also no reported difference in adverse effects such as tardive dyskinesia or the need for anticholinergic drugs.
Authors' conclusionsAlthough well-conducted and reported randomised trials are still needed to fully inform practice (no trial data exists reporting hospital and services outcomes, satisfaction with care and economics) pipotiazine palmitate is a viable choice for both clinician and recipient of care. |