European Psychiatry - Volume 33 - March 2016

338 / 812

S334 24th European Congress of Psychiatry / European Psychiatry 33S (2016) S116–S348
EW623
Antipsychotic monotherapy versus
combination in schizophrenia: Are
there differences in cognition?
A. Ruiz , A. Bra˜nas , M. Vicens , A. Orozco , G. Lahera ∗
1 Príncipe de Asturias University Hospital, Psychiatry, Alcalá- Madrid,
Spain
2 University of Alcalá- IRyCIS- CIBERSAM, Medicine and Medical
Specialties, Madrid, Spain
∗ Corresponding author.
Introduction Influential protocols in the treatment of schizophre-
nia recommend the use of antipsychotics inmonotherapy, although
combination is common in clinical practice.
Objectives/aims To compare cognitive performance of patients
with schizophrenia treated by antipsychotic monotherapy or
polytherapy; secondly, to analyze clinical and sociodemographic
differences.
Methods Ninety-eight outpatients between 18 and 65 years,
diagnosedwith schizophrenia, based on the DSM-Vwere recruited.
Seventywere inmonotherapy and 28 in antipsychotic combination.
Patients with comorbidity, moderate to severe motor impregna-
tion, abuse-substance dependence or serious somatic illness were
excluded. Both groups were compared in sociodemographic, clin-
ical and cognitive measures: PANSS scale, short Akathisia Scale
Simpson-Angus Scale, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), face
emotion recognition (FEIT) and global Functioning (GAF), speed
processing - through the Trail Making Test, parte A, subtest of
symbol coding of the Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophre-
nia (BACS) and Verbal fluency (animals)- and sustained attention
(SA)–through the Continuous Performance Test (CPT).
Results Both groups showed similar age, gender, number of hos-
pitalizations, score in STAI-Trait, STAI-State, ANGUS, GAF, TMT-A,
verbal fluency and face emotion recognition. Patients in polither-
apy had more years of evolution (P 0.047), higher score in positive
PANSS (P 0.007), negative PANSS (P0.008), general PANSS (P 0.001);
they showed more detection errors in the CPT (P 0008), and a trend
towards less processing speed through the symbol coding (P 0.063),
compared to patients in monotherapy.
Conclusions Antipsychotic polipharmacy is associated with an
impairment in sustained attention in patients with schizophrenia.
Disclosure of interest The authors have not supplied their decla-
ration of competing interest.
EW624
DECIDE study: Effectiveness of shared
decision making in treatment
planning at discharge of inpatient
with schizophrenia: Half sample
interim analysis, preliminary
conclusions
J. Pérez Revuelta ∗, I. Lara Ruiz-Granados , F. Gonzalez Saiz ,
J.M. Pascual Pa˜no , J.M. VIllagran Moreno
1 Servicio Andaluz Salud, Fundacion Biomedica Cadiz - Clinical
Management Unit of Mental Health, Jerez de la Frontera, Spain
2 Servicio Andaluz Salud, Macarena Clinical Management Unit of
Mental Health, Sevilla, Spain
3 Servicio Andaluz Salud, Clinical Management Unit of Mental Health,
Jerez de la Frontera, Spain
∗ Corresponding author.
DECIDE Study Effectiveness of shared decision making in treat-
ment planning at discharge of inpatient with schizophrenia:
interim analysis.
Introduction Shared decision-making denotes a structured pro-
cess that encourages full participation by patient and provider in
making complex medical decisions. Hamann et al. conducted a
few years ago a randomized controlled trial with schizophrenic
inpatients and found increased knowledge and perceived involve-
ment in decisions about antipsychotic treatment at discharge by
the experimental group, but not clear beneficial effects on long
termoutcomes. The present communication introduces theDECIDE
study.
Aims and objectives Of the study: to demonstrate the effective-
ness, measured as treatment adherence and readmissions at 3,
6 and 12 months, of shared decision making in the choice of
antipsychotic treatment at discharge in a simple of schizophren-
ics hospitalized after an acute episode of their disorder. Of the oral
presentation: to present preliminary conclusions with more of the
half of the sample.
Methods Randomized controlled trial, prospective, two parallel
groups, not masked, comparing two interventions (shared deci-
sion making and treatment as usual). Study population: inpatients
diagnosed of schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorders (ICD-
10/DSM-IV-R: F20 y F25) at Adult Acute Hospitalization Unit at
Jerez General Hospital.
Results At discharge, increased scale score COMRADE, both sub-
scales (Satisfacción in communication and trust in the decision)
statistically significant. At 3 months follow-up, intensification of
these differences in effect size and statistical significance and shows
trends in health outcomes. We will present results for 6 and 12
months.
Disclosure of interest The authors have not supplied their decla-
ration of competing interest.
EW625
Four years follow-up in a naturalistic
study of adults with ADHD treated
with atomoxetine
V. Richarte Fernández ∗ Corrales de la Cruz
P. Ibá˜nez Jiménez Corominas Rosso idal Estrada
C. Fadeuilhe Grau . Palma-Álvarez Casas Brugué
J.A. Ramos-Quiroga
1 University Hospital Vall d’Hebron, Department of
Psychiatry-CIBERSAM, Barcelona, Spain
2 University Hospital Vall d’Hebron, Department of Psychiatry,
Barcelona, Spain
∗ Corresponding author.
Introduction Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is
a psychiatric chronic disorder of childhood that persists into ado-
lescence and adulthood in the most part of cases. There are various
ways of treating ADHD.
Objectives Assess the effectiveness and tolerability of atom-
oxetine long-term and routine clinical practice in adult ADHD
treatment. Study the clinical profile of the patients who take ato-
moxetine.
Aims The aim of this is to study the treatment of ADHD in adults
with a non-stimulant drug atomoxetine.
Methods We obtain results from 126 patients recruited from July
2009 to May 2013 who have been prescribed Atomoxetine as a
treatment for ADHD from the hospital pharmacy.
Results Comorbid disorders were presented in 57.1% of the
patients included at the study (25.3% of which belong to the
group of anxiety disorders). The use of other psychotropic drugs
associated with atomoxetine was observed in 54.8% of patients.
The 62.7% of the patients concerned continued treatment beyond
225 weeks (4 years 3 months) of observation. The Clinical Global
Impression Improvement scale (CGI-I) and side effects determine
monitoring treatment. A total of 61.9% of patients responded sat-
isfactory to treatment with atomoxetine getting the CGI-I scale
a score of 1-2. The duration of therapy and patient age are fac-
tors that influence the response. Furthermore, the clinical profile