Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper was to review whether the $50m spent by the US National Institute of Mental Health in doing the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) trials found any useful evidence to change the clinical management of schizophrenia by psychiatrists. CONCLUSIONS: The CATIE trials were conducted in the US on 1460 enrolled patients in an effort to track how the drugs used to treat schizophrenia actually work in clinical practice (rather than in 6-week clinical trials). In a complex 3-phase design, patients were randomized to various types of (mostly) atypical antipsychotic drugs. Some 69-74% of patients switched antipsychotics for one reason or another during the 18 months of treatment. Some of the results were expensive confirmations of known prior results; of the commonly prescribed drugs, clozapine was the most effective, and olanzapine and ziprasidone caused the most and fewest metabolic side effects, respectively. The most stunning finding was that psychiatrists tend to ignore life-threatening, treatable medical conditions in patients presenting for treatment with schizophrenia. Of patients entering the study, 45% had untreated diabetes, 89% had untreated hyperlipidemias and 62% had untreated hypertension. This study failed to reveal anything of significant importance in the psychopharmacological treatment of schizophrenia, but did expose a woeful standard in the medical management of schizophrenia offered by psychiatrists. Psychiatrists should learn to properly treat diabetes, hyperlipidemia and hypertension when detected.