Topic
Psychotropic drug
About: Psychotropic drug is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 2309 publications have been published within this topic receiving 54070 citations.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
TL;DR: Natural psychotropic substances, particularly those with hallucinogenic and psychedelic properties and different chemical structures, may serve as new paths to novel psychotropic drug development.
Abstract: Multiple initiatives at the national and international level support natural drug discovery. Psychiatrists and patients are not well informed about natural psychotropics in general. Existing antidepressant and antipsychotic drugs were developed from atropine, a natural product. Subsequent drug developments were largely based on extension and modification of earlier molecular scaffolds. This limits their mechanisms of action to similar neuropathways. Natural psychotropic substances, particularly those with hallucinogenic and psychedelic properties and different chemical structures, may serve as new paths to novel psychotropic drug development.
11 citations
Patent•
28 Feb 1977
TL;DR: A method of treating patients having a psychiatric condition such as schizophrenia, or having an anxiety syndrome or other neurosis, comprising administering to such patient a therapeutically effective amount of a compound having the formula ##STR1## is described in this paper.
Abstract: A method of treating patients having a psychiatric condition such as schizophrenia, or having an anxiety syndrome or other neurosis, comprising administering to such patient a therapeutically effective amount of a compound having the formula ##STR1##
11 citations
TL;DR: For instance, the authors found that persons receiving atypical antipsychotic medication, AEDs/mood stabilizers, and anxiolytics had the greatest number of side effects.
Abstract: Forty-eight adults diagnosed with intellectual disabilities and Autistic Disorder or Pervasive Developmental Disorder-Not Otherwise Specified were examined with regard to psychotropic medication side effects. Participants were divided into 4 groups: no psychotropic medication group (n = 9); atypical antipsychotic medication group (n = 13); atypical antipsychotic and antiepileptic drug group (AEDs/mood stabilizers; n = 13); and a group of individuals receiving atypical antipsychotic medication, AEDs/mood stabilizers, and anxiolytics (n = 13). Those participants not currently prescribed any psychotropic medications evinced the fewest side effects. Participants prescribed psychotropic medication across multiple classes evinced more side effects. Thus, persons receiving atypical antipsychotic medication, AEDs/mood stabilizers, and anxiolytics had the greatest number of side effects. More specifically, the greatest number of side effects pertained to the CNS-Parkinsonism/Dyskinesia subscale.
11 citations
TL;DR: Although antidepressant use dropped, the difference in consumption levels between men and women grew significantly among the retired, and in the case of sedatives, risk of women taking sedatives increased in all groups except students.
Abstract: Objectives and setting Although psychotropic drugs are used to treat mental health disorders, little evidence analyses the effects the 2008 economic downturn had on psychotropic drug consumption in the case of Spain. We analyse these effects, considering both gender and employment situation. Participants We used the microdata from the face-to-face cross-sectional population-based Spanish National Health Survey for two periods: 2006–2007 (n=28 954) and 2011–2012 (n=20 509). Our samples included adults (>15 years old). Methods The response variables are consumption (or not) of antidepressants or sedatives and the explanatory variables are the year of the survey, gender and employment status. Covariates are mental health problems, mental health index General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) and self-reported health outcome variables such as self-rated health, chronic diseases, smoking behaviour, sleeping hours, body mass index, physical activity in the workplace, medical visits during the past year, age, region of residence (autonomous communities), educational level, marital status and social class of the reference person. Finally, we include interactions between time period, gender and employment status. We specify random effects logistic regressions and use Bayesian methods for the inference. Results The economic crisis did not significantly change the probability of taking antidepressant drugs (OR=0.56, 95% CI 0.18 to 2.56) nor sedatives (OR=1.21, 95% CI 0.26 to 5.49). In general, the probability of consuming antidepressants among men and women decreases, but there are differences depending on employment status. The probability of consuming sedatives also depends on the employment status. Conclusions While the year of the financial crisis is not associated with the consumption of antidepressants nor sedatives, it has widened the gap in consumption differences between men and women. Although antidepressant use dropped, the difference in consumption levels between men and women grew significantly among the retired, and in the case of sedatives, risk of women taking sedatives increased in all groups except students.
11 citations
TL;DR: Psychotropic drug interventions were more common after use of physical restraints than before and administration of opioids was more common.
Abstract: Background Restraining therapies (physical or pharmacological) are used to promote the safety of both patients and health care workers. Some guidelines recommend nonpharmacological or pharmacological interventions be used before physical restraints in critically ill patients. Objectives To characterize psychotropic drug interventions before and after use of physical restraints in critically ill adults receiving mechanical ventilation. Methods A single-center, prospective, observational study documenting psychotropic drug use and Sedation-Agitation Scale (SAS) scores in the 2 hours before and the 6 hours after application of physical restraints. Results Ninety-three patients were restrained for a median of 21 hours (interquartile range, 9-70 hours). Thirty percent of patients did not receive a psychotropic drug or had a drug stopped or decreased before physical restraints were applied. More patients received a psychotropic drug intervention after use of physical restraints than before (86% vs 56%, P = .001). Administration of opioids was more common after the use of physical restraints (54% vs 20% of patients, P = .001) and accounted for more drug interventions (45% vs 29%, P = .001). Fifty patients had SAS scores from both time periods; 16% remained oversedated, 24% were appropriately sedated, and 16% remained agitated in both time periods. Patients became oversedated (20%), more agitated (10%), less agitated (8%), and less sedated (6%) after restraint use. Conclusions Psychotropic drug interventions (mostly using opioids) were more common after use of physical restraints. Some patients may be physically restrained for anticipated treatment interference without consideration of pharmacological options and without documented agitation.
11 citations