Efficacy and Safety Profiles of Antipsychotic Drugs as Viewed by Psychiatrists: A Comparative Analysis of Cariprazine and Risperidone

Author:

Gvozdeckii Anton N.ORCID,Dobrovolskaya Alla E.ORCID,Prokopovich Galina A.ORCID,Sofronov Aleksandr H.ORCID

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Physicians hold the belief that the treatment outcomes and the treatment strategy they eventually adopt is largely determined by the differences in medications. Despite numerous studies focusing on the decision-making processes of psychiatrists, including the choice of antipsychotics when prescribing pharmacotherapy, the impact of therapeutic drug profiling on physicians’ decision-making remains poorly comprehended. AIM: The aim of this study is to assess the quantitative differences in perceptions of antipsychotics by psychiatrists using cariprazine and risperidone as examples. METHODS: A total of 79 psychiatrists were interviewed anonymously in St. Petersburg, Russia. The physicians documented the clinical advantages they perceived drugs to possess relative to one another, following a predetermined principle: A B, A=B, A B (2-AC protocol). The comparison is based on eleven parameters that assess the effectiveness and safety of cariprazine or risperidone. It has been hypothesized that the pattern of responses (qualitative difference) and the degree of preference for each drug (quantitative difference) may not align with the data in the original meta-analyses. RESULTS: The perception parameter exhibited a greater difference than anticipated (δ — 0.889), while the threshold for differentiating between the drugs was lower (τ — 1.001). The response pattern only aligned with theory by 44.37%. The dispersion of responses was associated with the length of work experience. CONCLUSION: The perceived difference between the drugs significantly deviates from the theoretical data, both in terms of strength of perception and pattern (quantitative and qualitative differences).

Publisher

ECO-Vector LLC

Subject

General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3