Pharmacopsychiatry 2015; 48(01): 25-29
DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1394396
Original Paper
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

The Effectiveness of a Computer Reminder System for Laboratory Monitoring of Metabolic Syndrome in Schizophrenic Outpatients Using Second-generation Antipsychotics

C.-L. Lai
1   Department of General Psychiatry, Taoyuan Psychiatric Center, Taoyuan City, Taiwan
,
H.-Y. Chan
1   Department of General Psychiatry, Taoyuan Psychiatric Center, Taoyuan City, Taiwan
2   Department of Psychiatry, National Taiwan University Hospital and College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
,
Y.-J. Pan
3   Department of Psychiatry, Far Eastern Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
4   Department of Public Health, School of Medicine, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan
,
C.-H. Chen
1   Department of General Psychiatry, Taoyuan Psychiatric Center, Taoyuan City, Taiwan
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

received 02 August 2014
revised 21 September 2014

accepted 29 September 2014

Publication Date:
28 October 2014 (online)

Preview

Abstract

Introduction: A computer reminder system (CRS) may help psychiatrists follow guidelines and monitor patients at risk of metabolic syndrome. This study explores the effectiveness of a CRS for outpatients with schizophrenia.

Methods: The study data were collected from July 2004 to July 2008. A CRS was implemented in July 2006. The intervention group was patients taking either clozapine, olanzapine, risperidone, or quetiapine with a CRS. The control group was patients taking either sulpiride or zotepine without a CRS. We defined a qualified patient visit (QPV) as a visit in which metabolic monitoring adhered to established guidelines when the patient visit was within 6 months of performing the recommended laboratory examinations. We compared the percentage difference in QPVs between the 2 study groups.

Results: The percentage of QPVs in the intervention group was significantly higher than the control group (OR=3.51, 95% CI=1.83~6.73, P=0.0002) after adjusting potential confounding factors. The intervention group was divided into a high metabolic risk (clozapine and olanzapine) subgroup and an intermediate metabolic risk (risperidone and quetiapine) subgroup and compared with the control group. The percentage of QPVs in the high risk subgroup was significantly higher than the intermediate risk subgroup (OR=4.27, 95% CI=2.71~6.75, p<0.0001) and control group (OR=6.99, 95% CI=3.48~14.07, p<0.0001).

Discussion: The percentage of QPVs in the intervention group was higher than the control group and the different metabolic risk of SGAs also influenced the performance of laboratory examinations. Further studies are needed to confirm the results of our studies.