Downloads provided by UsageCounts
Selecting the most effective treatment represents a critical challenge with the potential of modifying the long-term prognosis of individuals suffering a first break of psychosis. Head-to-head clinical trials comparing effectiveness among antipsychotic drugs in individuals with a first-episode of non-affective psychosis (FEP) are scarce.The rationale and design of a 3 phases clinical trial (PAFIP-3, NCT02305823) comparing the effectiveness of aripiprazole and risperidone, and to additionally assess the benefits of an early use of clozapine in primary treatment-resistant patients is reported. The design encompasses of 5 work packages (medication algorithm, cognitive functioning, psychoeducation/vocational functioning, imaging and biological markers) addressing critical issues and needs of first episode psychosis individuals and their cares. The primary outcome measure was treatment effectiveness assessed by all-cause treatment discontinuation rate.266 individuals have been included in the randomization study phase I (risperidone vs. aripiprazole). At 3 months, the retention rate was of 94% (249/266), 48(19.3%) patients have gone through phase II (olanzapine treatment), and 7(2.8%) entered the clozapine phase (phase III).The PAFIP 3 clinical trial may provide relevant information about clinical guidelines to optimally treat patients with a first episode of non-affective psychosis and the benefits and risks of an early use of clozapine in treatment resistant patients. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02305823.
Aripiprazole, Effectiveness, First-episode psychosis, Risperidone, Benzodiazepines, Psychotic Disorders, Schizophrenia, Antipsychotics, Humans, Prospective Studies, Clozapine, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Aripiprazole, Effectiveness, First-episode psychosis, Risperidone, Benzodiazepines, Psychotic Disorders, Schizophrenia, Antipsychotics, Humans, Prospective Studies, Clozapine, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 10 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
| views | 34 | |
| downloads | 42 |

Views provided by UsageCounts
Downloads provided by UsageCounts