Ethnic inequalities in clozapine use among people with treatment-resistant schizophrenia: a retrospective cohort study using data from electronic clinical records

Purpose

Clozapine is the most effective intervention for treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS). Several studies report ethnic disparities in clozapine treatment. However, few studies restrict analyses to TRS cohorts alone or address confounding by benign ethnic neutropenia. This study investigates ethnic equity in access to clozapine treatment for people with treatment-resistant schizophrenia spectrum disorder.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study, using information from 11 years of clinical records (2007–2017) from the South London and Maudsley NHS Trust. We identified a cohort of service-users with TRS using a validated algorithm. We investigated associations between ethnicity and clozapine treatment, adjusting for sociodemographic factors, psychiatric multi-morbidity, substance misuse, neutropenia, and service-use.

Results

Among 2239 cases of TRS, Black service-users were less likely to be receive clozapine compared with White British service-users after adjusting for confounders (Black African aOR = 0.49, 95% CI [0.33, 0.74], p = 0.001; Black Caribbean aOR = 0.64, 95% CI [0.43, 0.93], p = 0.019; Black British aOR = 0.61, 95% CI [0.41, 0.91], p = 0.016). It was additionally observed that neutropenia was not related to treatment with clozapine. Also, a detention under the Mental Health Act was negatively associated clozapine receipt, suggesting people with TRS who were detained are less likely to be treated with clozapine.

Conclusion

Black service-users with TRS were less likely to receive clozapine than White British service-users. Considering the protective effect of treatment with clozapine, these inequities may place Black service-users at higher risk for hospital admissions and mortality.

     

Adverse outcomes associated with recorded victimization in mental health electronic records during the first UK COVID-19 lockdown

Purpose

The impact of COVID-19 pandemic policies on vulnerable groups such as people with mental health problems who experience violence remains unknown. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of victimization recorded in mental healthcare records during the first UK lockdown, and associations with subsequent adverse outcomes.

Methods

Using a large mental healthcare database, we identified all adult patients receiving services between 16.12.2019 and 15.06.2020 and extracted records of victimisation between 16.03.2020 and 15.06.2020 (first UK COVID-19 lockdown). We investigated adverse outcomes including acute care, emergency department referrals and all-cause mortality in the year following the lockdown (16.06.2020- 01.11.2021). Multivariable Cox regressions models were constructed, adjusting for socio-demographic, socioeconomic, clinical, and service use factors.

Results

Of 21,037 adults receiving mental healthcare over the observation period, 3,610 (17.2%) had victimisation mentioned between 16.03.2020 and 15.06.2020 (first UK COVID-19 lockdown). Service users with mentions of victimisation in their records had an elevated risk for all outcomes: acute care (adjusted HR: 2.1; 95%CI 1.9–2.3, p < 0.001), emergency department referrals (aHR: 2.0; 95%CI 1.8–2.2; p < 0.001), and all-cause mortality (aHR: 1.5; 95%CI 1.1–1.9; p = 0.003), when compared to service users with no recorded victimisation. We did not observe a statistically significant interaction with gender; however, after adjusting for possible confounders, men had slightly higher hazard ratios for all-cause mortality and emergency department referrals than women.

Conclusion

Patients with documented victimisation during the first UK lockdown were at increased risk for acute care, emergency department referrals and all-cause mortality. Further research is needed into mediating mechanisms.