The system will be going down for regular maintenance. Please save your work and logout.
A novel way to understand and communicate the burden of AntiPsycHotic prescribing for adults across specialist Intellectual Disability services in England and Wales: the APHID feasibility study protocol
Authors
Stanyard, EmilyNeilens, Helen
Allgar, Victoria
Bailey, Matthew
Musicha, Crispin
Purandare, Kiran
Perera, Bhathika
Roy, Ashok
Sawhney, Indermeet
Watkins, Lance
Jaydeokar, Sujeet
Lennard, Sarah
Mitchell, Sarah
McGowan, Paula
Laugharne, Richard
Tromans, Samuel J.
Shankar, Rohit
Affiliation
University of Plymouth; Central & North West London NHS Foundation Trust; University College London; Coventry and Warwickshire Partnership NHS Trust; Hertfordshire Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust; University of South Wales; Cheshire and Wirral Partnership NHS Foundation Trust; University of Chester; Cornwall Partnership NHS Foundation Trust; Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust; University of LeicesterPublication Date
2025-05-09
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Background: The stopping overmedication of people with a learning disability, autism, or both (STOMP) programme was launched in 2016 in response to concerns about the over-prescribing of medication in people with intellectual disability. The programmes focus has been on the withdrawal of antipsychotic treatment for the individual person than the service or dosage optimisation. It could be that cumulative service level antipsychotic treatment converted and presented as chlorpromazine units could allow for comparison of services on how antipsychotic treatment is being utilised and allow for comparing of practices between services in different regions. The aim of this feasibility study is to explore if cumulative service scores of antipsychotic treatment burden could define prescribing patterns across different specialist intellectual disability services in England and Wales, focused on those on ≥2 antipsychotic treatments. There is no evidence to use ≥2 antipsychotic treatments for any individual. Methods: The study is a feasibility cross-sectional study investigating service antipsychotic treatment cumulative burden at seven annual time points, 2017–2023. De-identified data for adult patients with intellectual disability under the care of specialist intellectual disability services in receipt of ≥2 oral and/or long-acting IM (intramuscular) injectable (depot) antipsychotic treatments are included. Demographic and clinical data will be collated, in addition to information on the prescribed antipsychotic treatments. The data will be evaluated for data completeness and will be inputted into the Statistical Process Control tool. Outcomes will be measured using a combination of methods including descriptive analysis (including mean, standard deviation and percentage values), and a mixed effects regression model, to determine changes in chlorpromazine equivalent dose values over time. Results: Seven England and Wales National Health Service intellectual disability services are recruiting up to 490 people. There were recognised challenges in identifying the relevant eligible cohort across services and administering a common set of outcome measures. Discussion: This study is intended to inform decisions to design a wider registry that would involve antipsychotic treatment prescribing data for patients across multiple sites nationwide. Developing a de-identified database using routinely collected data, without the requirement for informed consent, comes with unique benefits and challenges. Registry reference: NCT06238089 (www.clinicaltrials.gov).Citation
Stanyard, E., Neilens, H., Allgar, V., Bailey, M., Musicha, C., Purandare, K., Perera, B., Roy, A., Sawhney, I., Watkins, L., Jaydeokar, S., Lennard, S., Mitchell, S., McGowan, P., Laugharne, R., Tromans. S. J., & Shankar, R. (2025). A novel way to understand and communicate the burden of AntiPsycHotic prescribing for adults across specialist Intellectual Disability services in England and Wales: the APHID feasibility study protocol. Frontiers in Health Services, 5, article-number 1393805. https://doi.org/10.3389/frhs.2025.1393805Publisher
Frontiers MediaJournal
Frontiers in Health ServicesAdditional Links
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/health-services/articles/10.3389/frhs.2025.1393805/fullType
ArticleDescription
© 2025 Stanyard, Neilens, Allgar, Bailey, Musicha, Purandare, Perera, Roy, Sawhney, Watkins, Jaydeokar, Lennard, Mitchell, McGowan, Laugharne, Tromans and Shankar. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.EISSN
2813-0146Sponsors
The Baily Thomas Charitable Fund (reference TRUST/VC/AC/SG6328-9580)ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.3389/frhs.2025.1393805
Scopus Count
Collections
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Licence for this article: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/


