Next Article in Journal
FLAIRectomy: Resecting beyond the Contrast Margin for Glioblastoma
Previous Article in Journal
Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation over the Supplementary Motor Area Combined with Walking on the Intramuscular Coherence of the Tibialis Anterior in a Subacute Post-Stroke Patient: A Single-Case Study
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Brain Sciences
Volume 12
Issue 5
10.3390/brainsci12050543
brainsci-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Assessment of Contributing Factors and Treatment Practices for Therapeutic Efficacy and Drug-Related Problems in Suicidal Psychotic Patients

by
Saimon Shahzad
1,
Sami Ullah
1,*,
Zahid Nazar
2,
Muhammad Riaz
3,
Fazli Khuda
1,
Atif Ali Khan Khalil
4,
Mikhlid H. Almutairi
5,
Amany A. Sayed
6,
Sultan Mehtap Büyüker
7 and
Nazimuddin Khan
8
1
Department of Pharmacy, University of Peshawar, Peshawar 25120, Pakistan
2
Department of Psychiatry, Medical Teaching Institute Lady Reading Hospital, Peshawar 25120, Pakistan
3
Shafique Psychiatric Clinic, Peshawar 25120, Pakistan
4
Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Medical Sciences, Rawalpindi 46000, Pakistan
5
Department of Zoology, College of Science, King Saud University, P.O. Box 2455, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia
6
Zoology Department, Faculty of Science, Cairo University, Giza 12613, Egypt
7
Department of Pharmacy Services, Üsküdar University, İstanbul 34664, Turkey
8
Department of Biochemistry, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston University, Boston, MA 02118, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Brain Sci. 2022, 12(5), 543; https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12050543
Submission received: 28 January 2022 / Revised: 9 April 2022 / Accepted: 21 April 2022 / Published: 25 April 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Psychiatric Diseases)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Suicide, a deliberate act of self-harm with the intention to die, is an emerging health concern but, unfortunately, the most under-researched subject in Pakistan, especially in Khyber Pukhtunkhwa (KPK). In this study, we aimed to identify risk factors that can be associated with suicidal behavior (SB) and to evaluate the prevailing treatment practices for therapeutic efficacy and drug-related problems (DRPs) in psychotic patients among the local population of KPK. A prospective, multicenter study was conducted for suicidal cases admitted to the study centers by randomized sampling. Socio-demographics and data on suicidal behavior were assessed using the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS), socioeconomic condition by Kuppuswamy socioeconomic scale (KSES) and treatment adherence by Morisky Medication-Taking Adherence Scale (MMAS-4). Drug-related problems and the therapeutic efficacy of prevailing treatment practices were assessed at baseline and follow-up after 3 months of treatment provided. Regarding suicidality (N = 128), females reported more ideations (63.1%), while males witnessed more suicidal behavior (66.6%, p < 0.001). Suicide attempters were mostly married (55.6%, p < 0.002); highly educated (53.9%, p = 0.004); dissatisfied with their life and had a previous history (p < 0.5) of suicide attempt (SA) (20.6%), self-injurious behavior (SIB) (39.7%) and interrupted (IA) or aborted attempts (AA) (22.2%). A greater improvement was observed in patients receiving combination therapy (p = 0.001) than pharmacotherapy (p = 0.006) or psychotherapy (p = 0.183), alone. DRPs were also detected, including drug-selection problems (17.88%), dose-related problems (20.64%), potential drug–drug interactions (24.31%), adverse drug reactions (11.46%) and other problems like inadequate education and counseling (21.55%). Furthermore, it was also found that psychotic patients with suicidal ideations (SI) were significantly (p = 0.01) more adherent to the treatment as compared to those with suicidal attempts. We concluded that suicide attempters differed significantly from patients with suicidal ideations in psychotic patients and presented with peculiar characteristics regarding socio-demographic factors. A combination of therapies and adherence to the treatment provided better outcomes, and targeted interventions are warranted to address drug-related problems.

1. Introduction

Suicide is a growing health problem, emerging as the second leading cause of death globally, with a 75% rate in developing and underdeveloped countries [1,2]. It has the highest ratio among individuals aged 15–29 years [3]. Studies in the general population reported a prevalence of 4–12% suicide attempts, with a recurrence ratio (persons who attempt suicide again) of 50% [4]. The World Health Organization reported an increase of 60% in global suicide rates in the last few years [3].
Unfortunately, suicidal behavior remains an under-researched subject in Pakistan [4], with the only available data obtained from police and hospital records, which are not properly maintained and updated. The World Health Organization published a report on suicide in 2014, which projected that in Pakistan, there were 7085 females and 6021 males among the total 13,377 suicides, with a rate of 7.5 per 100,000 [3]. This accounts for a 2.6% increase in the rate since 2000 [3]. The WHO also estimates that for every suicide, there are at least 10–20 acts of deliberate self-harm, and attempted suicide may occur up to 20 times more frequently than completed suicide [5,6,7]. By this approximation, there may be between 130,000 to 270,000 acts of deliberate self-harm in Pakistan per annum [3].
Attempted suicide is associated with adverse, long-term outcomes, including psychiatric and medical co-morbidities, hospitalization, repeated suicide attempts, chronic stress and stigma [8,9]. Known risk factors for suicidal behaviors are largely based on studies of general populations. These include prior suicide attempts, underlying psychiatric and substance abuse, single marital status, unemployment and major life stressors [9,10,11,12,13].
Currently, one growing area of research includes the study of the correlation of psychiatric disorders and suicide attempts [14,15]. Individuals with psychiatric illnesses contribute to a significant percentage of the individuals who attempt suicide [6]. However, reliable predictors of suicidal behavior among populations with serious psychiatric disorders remain elusive. Wide-scale screening of psychotic patients has been suggested as a method of early detection of suicidal behavior [16]. Defining high-risk psychotic patients will allow clinicians to effectively screen patients for suicidal behavior and develop suicide prevention methods in clinical settings.
In continuation to that, pharmacotherapy, electroconvulsive therapy and psychotherapies are used for the treatment of suicidal patients as well as the underlying cause of disease. However, evidence still needs to be established for more effective and safer treatment options against suicidal behavior. Pharmacotherapy is often associated with drug-related problems (DRPs) such as adverse effects, interactions, poly-pharmacy, adherence problems and contraindications [17,18,19,20]. The risk of these problems increases with the number and variety of drugs. Up to 40% of hospitalized patients suffer from drug-related problems [17], which result in considerable morbidity and mortality [19]. Fortunately, a substantial proportion of DRPs can be detected and prevented earlier by the efficient involvement and intervention of relevant health professionals [19,20,21,22,23,24] and by development of a standardized system for the identification, characterization and rectification of DRPs.
In light of the above facts, this study was designed (i) to assess various factors that can be associated with suicidal behavior, (ii) to evaluate the treatment efficacy and (iii) to determine the drug-related problems in the prevailing treatment practices in relieving the suicidal ideation and attempts in psychotic patients, which can further help to identify and suggest more tailored interventions.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design

This multicenter prospective study was conducted at Lady Reading Hospital, MTI, Peshawar; Shafique’s Psychiatric Clinic, Peshawar, and Sibtain Anwar Psychiatry Hospital, Mardan. Study protocols were approved by the Ethical Approval Committee, Department of Pharmacy, University of Peshawar, through testament reference number 15/EC-18/Pharm; dated 16.10.2018. Patients were stratified on the basis of suicidal behavior, e.g., Suicidal Ideation and/or Suicidal attempt (Single and multiple suicidal attempters). Outcome variables were collected and assessed at baseline and 3 months after treatment.

2.2. Sample Size

The Minimum size defined for the sample was 113 psychotic patients having suicidal tendencies, determined by using the given formula (Equation (1)) [25].
Sample Size = N = Z1−α/22 p (1 − p) /d2
whereas p = Prevalence (8%), Z1-a/2 = standard normal variate (1.96) and d = margin of error (0.05).

2.3. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

Participants were recruited at the above-mentioned healthcare centers in Khyber Pukhtunkhwa, Pakistan. The study population consisted of psychotic patients, positively diagnosed for suicidal behavior through the DSM-V criteria, aged 14–65 years, who had not taken treatment for suicidal behavior before the commencement of the study and psychotic inpatients having a lifetime history of attempted suicide, and those who provided informed consent to follow study procedures were included in the study conducted with effect from November 2018 till October 2020.
On the other hand, patients who were not ready to participate, could not answer the interview due to physical disability or cognitive impairment, were unable to communicate adequately, were taking treatment for suicidality for more than 3 days before the study and who could not provide the required data at follow up visits after 3 months were excluded from the study.

2.4. Methods for Assessment

Properly trained health professionals conducted a structured face-to-face interview, consisting of internationally recognized and validated questionnaires (described below). Participants were asked about socio-demographic characteristics, including age, gender, education and socioeconomic status.

2.5. Parametric Assessment

The major outcome variables were to identify risk factors that could be associated with suicidal behavior. Besides these, the improvement in suicidality and life satisfaction scores after the completion of prescribed treatment courses and treatment adherence by the patients at follow-up visits after 3 months of the treatment regimen were also assessed.

2.6. Suicidal Ideation and/or Attempt

The improvement or worsening level of suicidal ideation/attempt was evaluated by the mean score improvement on the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS).
The C-SSRS is a semi-structured interview that measures suicide ideation and behavior [26]. The first part, the severity scale, is a 6-point ordinal scale, ranging from 1 (wish to be dead) to 5 (suicidal intent with the plan). Adolescents who denied ideation received a zero. The second part, the behavior scale, is a 5-point nominal scale that investigates interrupted, aborted and actual suicide attempts; preparatory behavior for a suicide attempt and non-suicidal self-injurious behavior. Certified trained researchers conducted the C-SSRS interviews of the psychotic subjects. An improvement was considered as a decrease in the suicidal ideation score at the time point of interest/the end-point or last measurement during treatment (in this study, after 3 months of treatment) from the baseline measurement.

2.7. Contributing Factors for Suicidal Behavior

Various factors contributing towards suicidal behavior were assessed by the standardized, internationally recommended rating scales, i.e., socio-economic status through the “Kuppuswamy socio-economic scale (KSES)” [27], life satisfaction by the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) [28] and antipsychotics treatment as a potential risk by reviewing the previous medication taken.

2.8. Prevailing Treatment Practices

The treatment type as prescribed by their psychiatrists were categorized/ coded into 4 categories for a 3-month period of observation: (1) Psychotherapy— involved any form of cognitive behavior therapy and/or dialectical behavior therapy; (2) Pharmacotherapy—a prescription for any antipsychotic medication; (3) Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and (4) Combination therapy—a multiple therapy approach with any two or more therapies.

2.9. Drug-Related Problems

The prescriptions were evaluated for drug-related problems, including drug selection(s), dosage-related problem(s), drug-choice problem(s), potential drug–drug interaction(s), adverse reaction(s) and other associated problems.

2.10. Drug Adherence and Patient’s Compliance

The Morisky Medication-Taking Adherence Scale (MMAS-4) [29] was used at follow-up assessments to evaluate the level of compliance and adherence of the patients to their prescribed treatment.

2.11. Socio-Demographics

Baseline clinical predictors that were examined included sociodemographic characteristics, and independent variables like family history, socioeconomic condition, occupation, marital status, etc. were collected based on prior clinical and epidemiological studies of risk factors related to suicidality.

2.12. Analysis

Statistical package for social sciences (SPSS version 21) was used for data analysis. Descriptive statistics (frequencies, means, percentages and standard deviations) were computed. Inferential statistics, such as the chi-square test and odds ratios, were employed. For conclusive outcomes, false discovery rates were controlled/corrected using the Benjamini–Hochberg Procedure (B-H) using the formula (i/m) × Q, where: i = rank of p-value, m = total number of tests = 9 and Q = false discovery rate = 0.05 (5%).
Improvement in suicidality was assessed by comparing baseline and follow-up C-SSRS scores using a paired sample t-test. A significance level of 0.05 and a confidence interval of 95% were established for all analyses.

3. Results

3.1. Study Sample Characteristics

A total of 137 participants met the above-mentioned inclusion criteria for the said study. Nine subjects (7%) withdrew immediately and were not assessed. The final sample enrolled in this study comprised of 128 psychotic patients, among whom 63 (49.21%) had attempted suicide and 65 (50.78%) had active suicidal ideations without suicidal attempts.
Among 128 enrolled participants, 15 subjects (10.15%) failed to complete their follow-up at 3 months, and thus, 115 patients were left to complete the study from baseline to end-point. Figure 1 represents the number and sub-classification categories of participants approached for recruitment and included as a study sample for assessment regarding suicidality.

3.2. Socio-Demographics

The mean age of the study subjects was 23.85 years (standard deviation (SD) = 8.68 years, range of 13–65 years), and they were married (49.21%), Unemployed (28.12%) with high school or greater education (53.9%) and belonged to middle socioeconomic class (80.46%). The sample consisted of an approximately equal proportion of males (51.6%) and females (48.4%). The majority of the patients were dissatisfied (31.25%) or only slightly satisfied (22.65%) with their life and had a known history of suicidality, like previous suicide attempts (10.15%), self-injurious behavior (28.125%), interrupted/aborted attempts (10.93%) and suicidal ideations (25.78%). Besides these, a family history of suicidality was also present in a considerable proportion (35.15%) of the patients. The socio-demographic characteristics of the cases enrolled are summarized in Table 1.

3.3. Underlying Psychotic Diseases

For 128 participants, psychiatric assessments/diagnoses for suicidality were performed using the DSM-V criteria by the psychiatrists in the concerned study centers. Figure 2 represents the primary psychiatric diagnosis for study participants and Figure 3 represents the percentage wise distribution of underlying diagnoses in suicidal ideation and suicidal attempt groups.
From the above figure, it is evident that in those having only suicidal ideations (n = 65), most prevailing percentage (23.07%) were suffering from major depression, 29.23% had bipolar disorder, 13.84% had psychotic disorders and 15.38% had schizophrenia. Conversely, in patients with suicidal attempts, the underlying diagnoses were major depression (33.33%), bipolar disorder (25.39%), psychotic disorders (12.69%) and schizophrenia (7.93%).

3.4. Treatment Groups

As described earlier, therapeutic modalities were categorized into four distinct types, wherein the patient group treated with a combination therapy of electroconvulsive therapy and pharmacotherapy revealed greater improvement and showed more promising therapeutic outcomes than the psychotherapy (alone)-treated group at the endpoint assessment, i.e., after 3 months. This was evident by showing an improvement in suicidality scores on the Columbia suicide severity rating scale (C-SSRS) at follow-up visits (3 months after treatment). Data are depicted in Table 2 and Table 3.

3.5. Drug-Related Problems (DRPs)

Among the patients receiving medications, either in the pharmacotherapy group or combination of therapies, a total of 218 different types of drug-related problems were identified, which included drug-selection problems (17.88%), dose-related problems (20.64%), potential drug–drug interactions (24.31%), adverse drug reactions (11.46%) and other problems. The details of these problems are depicted in Table 4.

3.6. Treatment Adherence

Among 128 included patients, 115 subjects were able to complete the study until he follow-up assessment (after 3 months of duration). A Significant difference in treatment adherence was found in the patients with suicidal ideation versus those with suicidal behavior. Furthermore, data also depicted that, on the basis of the MMAS-4, 39 patients (33.04%) had a low adherence rate, 64 (56.52%) had an intermediate adherence rate and 12 (10.43%) had a high rate of adherence (Table 5).

4. Discussion

This study sought to identify characteristics and behaviors of psychotic patients associated with suicide ideations and attempts and, further, to compare the individuals who had attempted suicide and a group of psychiatric in-patients with suicidal ideations but no history of suicide attempts. These were worth-noting information to identify the potential risk factors among the vulnerable psychotic patients. The findings indicated that socio-demographic characteristics of the psychotic patients who had attempted suicide differed significantly from the subjects with suicidal ideations (Table 1).
In this regard, a significant difference was found (p < 0.001, B-H = 0.01, OR: 1.892) relative to suicidality between males and female participants, indicating that the ratio of suicidal ideation was more in females (63.1%) compared to males. However, suicidal behavior, like attempts, preparatory behaviors and interrupted and aborted attempts, were witnessed the most in males (66.6%). In sum, our findings demonstrated that females and males respond differently to suicidality.
The higher suicidal ideations in females may be explained by the fact that females are more responsible for family care, face more social pressure and exhibit poor psychological tolerance to negative life events. Women more often reported a strong negative impact on psychological well-being when they encountered adverse life events [30]. Thus, in the case of such events, they are more likely to have suicidal ideation than males but are usually reluctant to engage in a serious suicide attempt because the act is seen as violent and “masculine”. Secondly, they usually like to take others into consideration, which may become a deterrent to a suicide attempt. This can also be attributed to the ways in which females deal with problems and interact with others. They tend to share their experiences with friends, discuss their feelings, seek feedback and take advice [31].
Higher suicidal behaviors (attempts) in males could be explained and attributed to a few factors, including (1) that males are less likely to express and share their personal or work-related stress and problems with other people and attend psychological services compared to females [32,33,34]; (2) in Asian cultures, males are reserved in terms of the expression of sad emotions, which reflects their masculine identity, and they are expected to be strong not only physically, but also emotionally [35]; (3) males are more exposed to the use and availability of more lethal means, such as firearms and hanging methods [36,37] and to substance abuse; (4) furthermore, a male tendency to adopt avoidance strategies [38] might make it more difficult for them to cope with emotional and behavioral problems.
Therefore, there are more tendencies among males to have suicidal thinking when they are under stress. In stressful situations, they can be overwhelmed by irrational thoughts, negative emotions, feelings of hopelessness and a lack of social support and problem solving and coping skills in dealing with their stressful life events [32,33,34]. The results of this study are in line with previous studies, which showed that male youths had a considerably higher risk than females of suicide mortality and suicidality (i.e., ideation and/or attempt) [39,40,41].
Similarly, a significant difference (p < 0.002, B-H = 0.02, OR: 0.557) was found for suicidality regarding marital status, i.e., married versus unmarried subjects (see Table 1). There was a considerable percentage of patients (49.21%) who were married. However, previous literature reported suicide attempters as divorced/widowed [42] and less educated [41,43]. A study whose results are consistent with our findings reported that as many as 67% of the persons who committed suicide were married [44].
We also found a significant correlation (p = 0.004, B-H = 0.03, OR: 0.769) between educational levels and suicidality, with the least number of cases in patients educated until middle and high school and the trend gradually increasing with higher education (Table 1). The possible reasons might be that many higher education students live away from home and have less access and support from family and friends. Along with increased freedom and independence, students face greater stress from a variety of factors, such as increased academic demands, financial constraints and future insecurities. Previous studies in other populations also support our results that suicidal psychotic patients with a higher school attainment, compared with those having lower secondary school degrees, and had significantly higher ratios of suicidality [45]. This may be a considerable area to judge how those individuals with higher educational achievement may become more prone to suicide risk when facing failures, public shame and high premorbid behavior/functioning.
Our findings indicated that although the uncorrected p-value showed that socioeconomic status was associated with suicidal behavior, it was not significant on the B-H correction. However, socioeconomic conditions may affect the attitude towards suicidality, and the role of socioeconomic status in suicide may be worthy of further exploration.
Life satisfaction levels also differed between the suicidal ideation and suicidal attempt groups, and it was found that those dissatisfied with their life were more prone to suicidality.
A previous suicide attempt is the strongest predictor of a future completed suicide [46]. Our study also confirmed that suicidal attempters (p = 0.000002, B-H = 0.005, OR: 0.390) had a history of previous suicide attempts (20.6%), self-injurious behavior (39.7%) and a history of interrupted or aborted attempts (22.2%) along with suicidal ideations (17.5%). Therefore, the past history of patients should be viewed as a marker that alerts the concerned clinicians to an increase in suicide risk in those psychotic patients [10,46].
Our study showed that those who exhibited suicidal behavior (attempts) were approximately twice as likely to report suicide attempts among family members. For some of our patients, suicides among close relatives seemed to have influenced their own actions. This condition may have been the effect of suicide contagion (imitative behavior) [47]. Similarly, it was identified that a significant positive relationship exists between the family history of suicide and the multiple attempts reported. These findings are quite similar to other reports in the literature [48].
Factors such as age and occupation did not significantly differ between the suicidal ideation and suicidal attempt groups in this study, but they have been reported as significant risk factors in studies comparing cases to community controls. These findings suggest that known risk factors of suicidal behavior may not be applicable within psychotic inpatient populations, further confirming the necessity of identifying risk factors within psychotic patients.
Unsurprisingly, the most common underlying psychiatric diagnosis was major depression disorders (26%), followed by bipolar disorders (18%), psychotic disorders (13%), schizophrenia disorders (12%) and co-morbid psychotic conditions (19%). Similar to many studies in the literature [48,49], more than 80% of suicide attempters had major depressive disorders (56–87%). Our findings reflect the consistency of the variables that were referred to in the previous literature [48,49,50]. This clearly suggests that the treatment of the above disorders should be a major component of a sound suicide prevention strategy. Suicide is a multifaceted phenomenon involving several factors, which include neurobiological, genetic and psychosocial risk factors. The complex and variable nature of suicidality requires a multidimensional prevention approach. Several studies carried out on the brain have provided important neurobiological data related to abnormalities in suicide pathogenesis. The major systems where abnormalities have been observed in suicide and nonfatal suicide attempts are the serotonergic system and the stress response systems of the noradrenergic system and the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) axis [50].
Abnormalities in the serotonergic system have been widely implicated in suicidal behavior and ideations. This is primarily based on the studies of 5HT and its metabolite, 5- hydroxyl-indole-acetic acid (5HIAA), in the CSF [51] and blood [52] of suicidal patients; studies of 5HT receptor subtypes in the platelets of suicidal patients [53] in postmortem brains of suicide victims [54] and on serotonin neuroendocrine challenge studies [55]. The main evidence linking serotonin with suicide was derived from studies of 5HIAA, a major metabolite of 5HT in the CSF of suicidal patients. Several studies found low 5HIAA levels in the CSF of these subjects [56]. There is also an association between hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) axis dysfunction and suicide. The feedback regulation of the HPA axis by glucocorticoids is mediated through two different intracellular receptor subtypes, known as mineralocorticoid (MR) and glucocorticoid receptors (GR) [57]. Investigators have found an association between the dexamethasone suppression test (DST) and suicide; DST non-suppressors have been reported to be significantly more likely to commit and complete suicide than DST suppressors [58,59,60,61,62]. A significant decrease in the number of corticotrophin releasing factor (CRF) receptor binding sites in the frontal cortex of suicide victims compared with controls has also been reported [63].
Clinical application of this knowledge reflects that those serotonergic agents targeting 5HT2A receptors or 5HTT may promise a therapy for suicidal behavior. Thus, 5HT agonists may be useful in the treatment and prevention of suicidal behavior. Furthermore, targeting CRF or GR for the development of treatment for suicidal behavior may have some promise.
The severity of the suicide problem and the lack of long-term assessment of therapeutic strategies at the national and global levels demands that the efficacy of prevailing treatment regimens need to be assessed. For this, four of the considered regimen included (1) psychotherapy, (2) pharmacotherapy, (3) electroconvulsive therapy and (4) Combination therapy. The assessment was performed on the basis of improvement in mean suicidality scores on the Columbia suicide severity rating scale at follow-up visits 3 months after treatment.
Results of the study revealed that the patients who received combination therapy (Mean C-SSRS Score Improvement = 2.14, t34 = 3.52, p = 0.001) and electroconvulsive therapy (Mean C-SSRS Score Improvement = 2.91, t24 = 3.98, p = 0.001) showed greater improvement at the end of treatment than those receiving Pharmacotherapy therapy (Mean C-SSRS Score Improvement = 1.57, t32 = 2.93, p = 0.006) and electroconvulsive therapy (Mean C-SSRS Score Improvement = 1.09, t21 = 1.37, p = 0.183). Looking through the trend, various explanations could be put forward for the improvement in suicidality. The identification of neurobiological dysfunction in the above lines suggests targets for various treatment interventions, including ECT and pharmacotherapy, that may have protective effects against suicidal behavior by correcting the dysfunctions of neurotransmitters, the neuroendocrine system and the stress response system, which have been determined for the neurobiology of suicidality [64]. Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a non-pharmacologic treatment with an understudied therapeutic mechanism [14]. However, it is thought that a single ECT procedure induces a myriad of changes in the central nervous system, including a surge in circulating corticotrophins, prolactin and cortisol; changes in the immune system and increases in platelet serotonin transporters, which may be helpful to counter suicidality [65]. Pharmacotherapy in the form of antidepressants, serotonin reuptake inhibitors, antipsychotics and drugs employed to treat schizophrenia are also responsible for the correction of neurotransmitters, the neuroendocrine system and the stress response system, which, in turn, may improve suicidality, as we have discussed above that the imbalance of these system contributes to suicidality. By its nature, psychotherapy focuses on the person’s individual, subjective experience of a suicidal crisis, and there is compelling evidence that person-centered psychological treatments can significantly reduce suicidal behavior [66], particularly for patients with a history of attempted suicide. However, the lack of standard approaches and operational definitions and the paucity of standardized, reliable assessment tools to measure the suicidal outcome make it difficult to define a proper mechanism on how it can treat suicidality. Combination therapy approaches may also be effective in treating suicidality, as they can potentially add up all the benefits of various mechanisms that we had discussed until now.
Our results were consistent with previously published studies that reported the superiority of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) [67] and indicated that ECT can be significantly more effective than pharmacotherapy [68,69,70]. In conclusion, the combination of psychotherapy, ECT and pharmacotherapy for suicidality may provide a slight advantage, whereas psychotherapy alone is not significantly effective.
The outcomes of the study have shown that the effective use of pharmacotherapy and a combination of therapies has the potential to address the increased suicidality seen in psychotic patients. However, the likelihood and higher frequency of DRPs (Table 4) in these patients need special attention and a remedial strategy.
Furthermore, it was also found that patients with suicidal ideations were significantly (p = 0.01) more adherent to the treatment as compared to those with suicidal attempts. Table 5 clearly indicates a positive association between treatment adherence and a decrease in suicidal behavior (attempts). A number of compliant patients who were previously categorized in the suicidal behavior group owing to an increased C-SSRS score and suicidal attempts reported a decrease in C-SSRS Scores and suicidality at their follow-up. These findings can be attributed to treatment adherence. The CSSRS Scores remained the same or even increased in those patients who discontinued or were not adherent to their treatment, which indicates that discontinuation of a prescribed treatment results in cessation of its anti-depressive, anti-schizophrenic or anti-psychotic effects and, hence, aggravates the symptoms of these disorders, among which it can enhance the risks for suicidality. Another possibility is that adherence is inversely related to levels of mental illness: as the burden of disease increases, the capability of sustaining treatment adherence decreases, which, in turn, affects the course of illness [71]. Indeed, a possibility exists that discontinuation or switching of treatments may give rise to withdrawal symptoms and rebound phenomena, whereby symptoms, including suicidality, may reoccur [72]. Nevertheless, our results are consistent with previous longitudinal studies that have identified treatment attrition as an important marker of suicide reattempts [73,74], whereas treatment compliance has been recognized as a protective factor for suicidality [75,76].

5. Practical Implications

The clinical implications of this study include that it can help to identify a variety of risk factors for suicidality in psychotic patients. A correct clinical/diagnostic assessment of these patients, which includes the presence of depression as a comorbid condition through an agile instrument such as the PHQ-9 [77] and determination of the presence/severity of suicidal ideation using Beck’s Scale SSI [78,79].

6. Strengths and Limitations of the Study

There are three key strengths of the current study. First, a rigorous qualitative methodological approach was employed, and the study comes from a country where work on the topic of suicide is scarce, a factor that contributes to a more comprehensive understanding of the problem. Second, the study involved a diverse sample of individuals with suicide of different ages; genders; occupations; educational levels and diagnoses, including in psychotic patients, and tried to highlight the particularities of this phenomenon’s manifestation in this specific population (a topic that is still quite neglected in the literature of suicidology), which contributed to the richness of the data. Third, the study results can enable professionals and researchers to understand the impact of and relationships between psychosis and suicidal thoughts and behaviors.
There were two limitations of the current study which can be taken into consideration. First, this study was limited in scope by the relatively narrow range of demographic, social and clinical correlates. Although we reported some of the most widely studied variables (e.g., age, gender, occupation and education), we could not evaluate complex variables adequately, such as the onset of illness, extent of substance abuse/dependence and adequacy of antipsychotic and antidepressant medication. Second, we relied on a clinical diagnosis at admission, and thus, replication of our observation is needed with structured diagnoses.

7. Conclusions

Our findings indicated that suicide attempters differed significantly from those having suicidal ideations only on the basis of factors such as gender, marital status, educational level, life satisfaction and history. The combination of therapies was advantageous, whereas psychotherapy alone was not effective (significantly). Treatment adherence translates to better outcomes. DRPs pose a serious threat to the outcomes of pharmacotherapy and combination therapy; therefore, targeted interventions are warranted.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization and methodology, S.U. and S.S.; validation, Z.N. and M.H.A.; formal analysis, S.S. and S.M.B.; investigation, Z.N. and M.R.; writing—original draft preparation, S.S. and N.K.; writing—review and editing, S.U. and A.A.S.; visualization, F.K. and A.A.K.K.; supervision, S.U. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This project was supported by the Researchers Supporting Project number (RSP-2021/191), King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Ethical Approval Committee, Department of Pharmacy, University of Peshawar, through testament reference number 15/ EC-18/Pharm, dated 16 October 2018.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Persson, G.; Danielsson, M.; Rosén, M.; Alexanderson, K.; Lundberg, O.; Lundgren, B.; Stenbeck, M.; Wall, S. Health in Sweden, the National Public Health Report. Scand J. Public Health Suppl. 2006, 67, 3–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Allgulander, C. Suicide and mortality patterns in anxiety neurosis and depressive neurosis. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 1994, 51, 708–712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. World Health Organization. Preventing Suicide: A Global Imperative; World Health Organization: Luxembourg, 2014; Available online: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/131056/9789241564779_eng.pdf (accessed on 15 September 2019).
  4. Khan, M.M.; Ali Hyder, A. Suicides in the developing world: Case study from Pakistan. Suicide Life Threat. Behav. 2006, 36, 76–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Definitions: Self-Directed Violence. Injury Prevention and Control: Division of Violence. 2015. Available online: http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/suicide/definitions.html (accessed on 20 September 2019).
  6. Mann, J.J. Neurobiology of suicidal behaviour. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2003, 4, 819–828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Crosby, A.; Gfroerer, J.; Han, B.; Ortega, L.; Parks, S.E. Suicidal Thoughts and Behaviors among Adults Aged_18 Years; United States, 2008–2009; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, US Department of Health and Human Services: Atlanta, GA, USA, 2011.
  8. Goldman-Mellor, S.J.; Caspi, A.; Harrington, H.; Hogan, S.; Nada-Raja, S.; Poulton, R.; Moffitt, T.E. Suicide attempt in young people: A signal for long-term health care and social needs. JAMA Psychiatry 2014, 71, 119–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Nock, M.K.; Borges, G.; Bromet, E.J.; Alonso, J.; Angermeyer, M.; Beautrais, A.; Bruffaerts, R.; Chiu, W.T.; de Girolamo, G.; Gluzman, S.; et al. Cross-national prevalence and risk factors for suicidal ideation, plans and attempts. Br. J. Psychiatry 2008, 192, 98–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Ekramzadeh, S.; Javadpour, A.; Draper, B.; Mani, A.; Withall, A.; Sahraian, A. Prevalence and correlates of suicidal thought and self-destructive behavior among an elderly hospital population in Iran. Int. Psychogeriatr. 2012, 24, 1402–1408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Kessler, R.C.; Borges, G.; Walters, E.E. Prevalence of and risk factors for lifetime suicide attempts in the National Comorbidity Survey. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 1999, 56, 617–626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Furlanetto, L.M.; Stefanello, B. Suicidal ideation in medical inpatients: Psychosocial and clinical correlates. Gen. Hosp. Psychiatry 2011, 33, 572–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Qin, P.; Agerbo, E.; Mortensen, P.B. Suicide risk in relation to socioeconomic, demographic, psychiatric, and familial factors: A national register-based study of all suicides in Denmark, 1981–1997. Am. J. Psychiatry 2003, 160, 765–772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Luoma, J.B.; Martin, C.E.; Pearson, J.L. Contact with mental health and primary care providers before suicide: A review of the evidence. Am. J. Psychiatry 2002, 159, 909–916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Smith, K.; Crawford, S. Suicidal behavior among “normal” high school students. Suicide Life Threat. Behav. 1986, 16, 313–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Granello, D.H. The process of suicide risk assessment: Twelve core principles. J. Couns. Dev. JCD 2010, 88, 363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Maher, R.L.; Hanlon, J.; Hajjar, E.R. Clinical consequences of polypharmacy in elderly. Expert Opin. Drug Saf. 2014, 13, 57–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  18. Ismail, M.; Iqbal, Z.; Khattak, M.B.; Javaid, A.; Khan, M.; Khan, T.; Asim, S.M. Potential Drug-Drug Interactions in Psychiatric Ward of a Tertiary Care Hospital: Prevalence, Levels and Association with Risk Factors. Trop. J. Pharm. Res. 2012, 11, 289–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Leendertse, A.J.; Egberts, A.C.; Stoker, J. Frequency of and risk factors for preventable medication-related hospital admissions in the Netherlands. Arch. Intern. Med. 2008, 168, 1890–1896. [Google Scholar]
  20. Howard, R.L.; Avery, A.; Slavenburg, S.; Royal, S.; Pipe, G.; Lucassen, P.; Pirmohamed, M. Which drugs cause preventable admissions to hospital? A systematic review. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2007, 63, 136–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Blix, H.S.; Viktil, K.K.; Moger, T.A.; Reikvam, Å. Characteristics of drug-related problems discussed by hospital pharmacists in multidisciplinary teams. Pharm. World Sci. 2006, 28, 152–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Bedouch, P.; Sylvoz, N.; Charpiat, B.; Juste, M.; Roubille, R.; Rose, F.-X.; Bosson, J.-L.; Conort, O.; Allenet, B. Trends in pharmacists’ medication order review in French hospitals from 2006 to 2009: Analysis of pharmacists’ interventions from the Act-IP© website observatory. J. Clin. Pharm. Ther. 2015, 40, 32–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Guignard, B.; Bonnabry, P.; Perrier, A.; Dayer, P.; Desmeules, J.; Samer, C.F. Drug-related problems identification in general internal medicine: The impact and role of the clinical pharmacist and pharmacologist. Eur. J. Intern. Med. 2015, 26, 399–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Abunahlah, N.; Elawaisi, A.; Velibeyoglu, F.M.; Sancar, M. Drug related problems identified by clinical pharmacist at the Internal Medicine Ward in Turkey. Int. J. Clin. Pharm. 2018, 40, 360–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Charan, J.; Biswas, T. How to calculate sample size for different study designs in medical research. Indian J. Psychol. Med. 2013, 35, 121–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  26. Gipson, P.Y.; Agarwala, P.; Opperman, K.J.; Horwitz, A.; King, C.A. Columbia-suicide severity rating scale: Predictive validity with adolescent psychiatric emergency patients. Pediatric Emerg. Care 2015, 31, 88–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Wani, R.T. Socioeconomic status scales-modified Kuppuswamy and UdaiPareekh’s scale updated for 2019. J. Fam. Med. Prim. Care 2019, 8, 1846–1849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Arrindell, W.; Meeuwesen, L.; Huyse, F. The satisfaction with life scale (SWLS): Psychometric properties in a non-psychiatric medical outpatients’ sample. Personal. Individ. Differ. 1991, 12, 117–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Sidorkiewicz, S.; Tran, V.-T.; Cousyn, C.; Perrodeau, E.; Ravaud, P. Development and validation of an instrument to assess treatment adherence for each individual drug taken by a patient. BMJ Open 2016, 6, e010510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Seematter-Bagnoud, L.; Karmaniola, A.; Santos-Eggimann, B. Adverse life events among community-dwelling persons aged 65–70 years: Gender differences in occurrence and perceived psychological consequences. Soc. Psychiatry Psychiatr. Epidemiol. 2010, 45, 9–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  31. Murphy, G.E. Why women are less likely than men to commit suicide. Compr. Psychiatry 1998, 39, 165–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Charbonneau, A.M.; Mezulis, A.H.; Hyde, J.S. Stress and emotional reactivity as explanations for gender differences in adolescents’ depressive symptoms. J. Youth Adolesc 2009, 38, 1050–1058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Galdas, P.M.; Cheater, F.; Marshall, P. Men and health help-seeking behaviour: Literature review. J. Adv. Nurs 2005, 49, 616–623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Verma, R.; Balhara, Y.P.S.; Gupta, C.S. Gender differences in stress response: Role of developmental and biological determinants. Ind. Psychiatry J. 2011, 20, 4. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  35. Naghavi, F.; Redzuan, M. The relationship between gender and emotional intelligence. World ApplSci. J. 2011, 15, 555–561. [Google Scholar]
  36. Beautrais, A.L. Suicide and serious suicide attempts in youth: A multiple-group comparison study. Am. J. Psychiatry 2003, 160, 1093–1099. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Rhodes, A.E.; Lu, H.; Skinner, R. Time trends in medically serious suicide-related behaviours in boys and girls. Can. J. Psychiatry 2014, 59, 556–560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  38. Gould, M.S.; Velting, D.; Kleinman, M.; Lucas, C.; Thomas, J.G.; Chung, M. Teenagers’ attitudes about coping strategies and help-seeking behavior for suicidality. J. Am. Acad. Child. Adolesc. Psychiatry 2004, 43, 1124–1133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Canetto, S.S.; Sakinofsky, I. The gender paradox in suicide. Suicide Life-Threat. Behav. 1998, 28, 1–23. [Google Scholar]
  40. Stone, D.M.; Holland, K.M.; Bartholow, B.; Crosby, A.E.; Davis, S.; Wilkins, N. Preventing Suicide: A Technical Package of Policies, Programs, and Practices. Atlanta, GA: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Suicide Prevention: Youth Suicide. 2014. Available online: http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pub/youth_suicide.html (accessed on 22 September 2019).
  41. Kposowa, A.J. Marital status and suicide in the National Longitudinal Mortality Study. J. Epidemiol. Commun. Health 2000, 54, 254–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  42. Agerbo, E. High income, employment, postgraduate education, and marriage: A suicidal cocktail among psychotic patients. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 2007, 64, 1377–1384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  43. Pompili, M.; Vichi, M.; Qin, P.; Innamorati, M.; De Leo, D.; Girardi, P. Does the level of education influence completed suicide? A nationwide register study. J. Affect. Disord. 2013, 147, 437–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Gibb, S.; Beautrais, A. Epidemiology of attempted suicide in Canterbury province, New Zealand (1993–2002). N. Z. Med. J. 2004, 117, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  45. Cullberg, J.; Wasserman, D.; Stefansson, C.G. Who commits suicide after a suicide attempt? An 8 to 10 year follow up in a suburban catchment area. ActaPsychiatr Scand. 1988, 77, 598–603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Pompili, M.; Innamorati, M.; Szanto, K.; Di Vittorio, C.; Conwell, Y.; Lester, D.; Tatarelli, R.; Girardi, P.; Amore, M. Life events as precipitants of suicide attempts among first-time suicide attempters, repeaters, and non-attempters. Psychiatry Res. 2011, 186, 300–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Beautrais, A.; Joyce, P.; Mulder, R.; Fergusson, D.M.; Deavoll, B.J.; Nightingale, S.K. Prevalence and comorbidity of mental disorders in persons making serious suicide attempts: A case-control study. Am. J. Psychiatry 1996, 153, 1009–1014. [Google Scholar]
  48. Beautrais, A.L. Suicides and serious suicide attempts: Two populations or one? Psychol. Med. 2001, 31, 837–845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Jackson, C.A.; Henderson, M.; Frank, J.W.; Haw, S.J. An overview of prevention of multiple risk behaviour in adolescence and young adulthood. J. Public Health 2012, 34 (Suppl. S1), i31–i40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  50. Berardelli, I.; Serafini, G.; Cortese, N.; Fiaschè, F.; O’Connor, R.C.; Pompili, M. The Involvement of Hypothalamus-Pituitary-Adrenal (HPA) Axis in Suicide Risk. Brain Sci. 2020, 10, 653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Lester, D. The concentration of neurotransmitter metabolites in the cerebrospinal fluid of suicidal individuals: A meta-analysis. Pharmacopsychiatry 1995, 28, 45–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Rao, M.L.; Hawellek, B.; Papassotiropoulos, A.; Deister, A.; Frahnert, C. Upregulation of the platelet Serotonin2A receptor and low blood serotonin in suicidal psychotic patients. Neuropsychobiology 1998, 38, 84–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  53. Pandey, G.N.; Pandey, S.C.; Dwivedi, Y.; Sharma, R.P.; Janicak, P.G.; Davis, J.M. Platelet serotonin-2A receptors: A potential biological marker for suicidal behavior. Am. J. Psychiatry 1995, 152, 850–855. [Google Scholar]
  54. Pandey, G.N.; Dwivedi, Y. What can post-mortem studies tell us about the patho-etiology of suicide? Future Neurol. 2010, 5, 701–720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  55. Meltzer, H.Y.; Perline, R.; Tricou, B.J.; Lowy, M.; Robertson, A. Effect of 5-hydroxytryptophan on serum cortisol levels in major affective disorders. II. Relation to suicide, psychosis, and depressive symptoms. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 1984, 41, 379–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Banki, C.M.; Arato, M.; Papp, Z.; Kurcz, M. Biochemical markers in suicidal patients. Investigations with cerebrospinal fluid amine metabolites and neuroendocrine tests. J. Affect. Disord. 1984, 6, 341–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Reul, J.M.; de Kloet, E.R. Two receptor systems for corticosterone in rat brain: Microdistribution and differential occupation. Endocrinology 1985, 117, 2505–2511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Yerevanian, B.I.; Feusner, J.D.; Koek, R.J.; Mintz, J. The dexamethasone suppression test as a predictor of suicidal behavior in unipolar depression. J. Affect. Disord. 2004, 83, 103–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Coryell, W.; Schlesser, M.A. Suicide and the dexamethasone suppression test in unipolar depression. Am. J. Psychiatry 1981, 138, 1120–1121. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  60. Lester, D. The dexamethasone suppression test as an indicator of suicide: A meta-analysis. Pharmacopsychiatry 1992, 25, 265–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Norman, W.H.; Brown, W.A.; Miller, I.W.; Keitner, G.I.; Overholser, J.C. The dexamethasone suppression test and completed suicide. ActaPsychiatrScand 1990, 81, 120–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Yerevanian, B.I.; Olafsdottir, H.; Milanese, E.; Russotto, J.; Mallon, P.; Baciewicz, G.; Sagi, E. Normalization of the dexamethasone suppression test at discharge from hospital. Its prognostic value. J. Affect. Disord. 1983, 5, 191–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Nemeroff, C.B.; Owens, M.J.; Bissette, G.; Andorn, A.C.; Stanley, M. Reduced corticotropin releasing factor binding sites in the frontal cortex of suicide victims. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 1988, 45, 577–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Filaković, P.; Erić, A.P. Pharmacotherapy of suicidal behaviour in major depression, schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Coll. Antropol. 2013, 37, 1039–1044. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  65. Kobeissi, J.; Aloysi, A.; Tobias, K.; Popeo, D.; Kellner, C.H. Resolution of severe suicidality with a single electroconvulsive therapy. J. ECT 2011, 27, 86–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Schechter, M.; Ronningstam, E.; Herbstman, B.; Goldblatt, M.J. Psychotherapy with Suicidal Patients: The Integrative Psychodynamic Approach of the Boston Suicide Study Group. Medicina 2019, 55, 303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  67. Sackeim, H.A. Modern electroconvulsive therapy: Vastly improved yet greatly underused. JAMA Psychiatry 2017, 4, 779–780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Dierckx, B.; Heijnen, W.T.; van den Broek, W.W.; Birkenhäger, T.K. Efficacy of electroconvulsive therapy in bipolar versus unipolar major depression: A meta-analysis. Bipolar Disord. 2012, 14, 146–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Husain, M.M.; Rush, A.J.; Fink, M.; Knapp, R.; Petrides, G.; Rummans, T.; Biggs, M.M.; O’Connor, K.; Rasmussen, K.; Litle, M.; et al. Speed of response and remission in major depressive disorder with acute electroconvulsive therapy (ECT): A Consortium for Research in ECT (CORE) report. J. Clin. Psychiatry 2004, 65, 485–491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Higashi, K.; Medic, G.; Littlewood, K.J.; Diez, T.; Granström, O.; De Hert, M. Medication adherence in schizophrenia: Factors influencing adherence and consequences of nonadherence, a systematic literature review. Ther. Adv. Psychopharmacol. 2013, 3, 200–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  71. Cerovecki, A.; Musil, R.; Klimke, A.; Seemüller, F.; Haen, E.; Schennach, R.; Kühn, K.U.; Volz, H.P.; Riedel, M. Withdrawal symptoms and rebound syndromes associated with switching and discontinuing atypical antipsychotics: Theoretical background and practical recommendations. CNS Drugs 2013, 27, 545–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Chan, L.F.; Shamsul, A.S.; Maniam, T. Are predictors of future suicide attempts and the transition from suicidal ideation to suicide attempts shared or distinct: A 12-month prospective study among patients with depressive disorders. Psychiatry Res. 2014, 220, 867–873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Rush, A.J.; Trivedi, M.H.; Wisniewski, S.R.; Nierenberg, A.A.; Stewart, J.W.; Warden, D.; Niederehe, G.; Thase, M.E.; Lavori, P.W.; Lebowitz, B.; et al. Acute and longer-term outcomes in depressed outpatients requiring one or several treatment steps: A STAR*D report. Am. J. Psychiatry 2006, 163, 1905–1917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Irigoyen, M.; Porras-Segovia, A.; Galván, L.; Puigdevall, M.; Giner, L.; De Leon, S.; Baca-García, E. Predictors of re-attempt in a cohort of suicide attempters: A survival analysis. J. Affect. Disord. 2019, 247, 20–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Callor, W.B.; Petersen, E.; Gray, D.; Grey, T.; Lamoreaux, T.; Bennett, P.J. Preliminary findings of noncompliance with psychotropic medication and prevalence of methamphetamine intoxication associated with suicide completion. Crisis 2005, 26, 78–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Granboulan, V.; Roudot-Thoraval, F.; Lemerle, S.; Alvin, P. Predictive factors of post-discharge follow-up care among adolescent suicide attempters. ActaPsychiatr Scand. 2001, 104, 31–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Costantini, L.; Pasquarella, C.; Odone, A.; Colucci, M.E.; Costanza, A.; Serafini, G.; Aguglia, A.; Murri, M.B.; Brakoulias, V.; Amore, M.; et al. Screening for depression in primary care with Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9): A systematic review. J. Affect. Disord. 2021, 279, 473–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Beck, A.T.; Steer, R.A. Manual for Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation; Psychological Corporation: San Antonio, TX, USA, 1991. [Google Scholar]
  79. Posner, K.; Brown, G.K.; Stanley, B.; Brent, D.A.; Yershova, K.V.; Oquendo, M.A.; Currier, G.W.; Melvin, G.A.; Greenhill, L.; Shen, S.; et al. The Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale: Initial validity and internal consistency findings from three multisite studies with adolescents and adults. Am. J. Psychiatry 2011, 168, 1266–1277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Brainsci 12 00543 g001 550
Figure 1. Number and sub classification categories of participants approached for recruitment and included as a study sample for assessment regarding suicidality.
Figure 1. Number and sub classification categories of participants approached for recruitment and included as a study sample for assessment regarding suicidality.
Brainsci 12 00543 g001
Brainsci 12 00543 g002 550
Figure 2. The percentage wise distribution of the underlying diagnosis of the patient with suicidality.
Figure 2. The percentage wise distribution of the underlying diagnosis of the patient with suicidality.
Brainsci 12 00543 g002
Brainsci 12 00543 g003 550
Figure 3. Variety and percentage wise distribution of the underlying diagnosis of the patients with suicidal behavior (Ideation and/or Attempts).
Figure 3. Variety and percentage wise distribution of the underlying diagnosis of the patients with suicidal behavior (Ideation and/or Attempts).
Brainsci 12 00543 g003
Table
Table 1. Socio-demographic characteristics of the participants included for the assessment of suicidal behavior (N = 128); data is presented as N (%).
Table 1. Socio-demographic characteristics of the participants included for the assessment of suicidal behavior (N = 128); data is presented as N (%).
CategorySuicidal Ideation OnlySuicidal Behavior (Attempts)Totalχ2dfAsymp. Sig. (2-Sided) p-ValueB-H Value (FDR)Odds Ratio
(OR)
N = 65N = 63N = 128
Family History of SuicideYes14 (31.1)31 (68.9)45 (35.15)10.7410.001 *0.013.529
No51 (61.4)32 (38.6)83 (64.84)
GenderMales24 (36.4)42 (63.6)66 (51.56)11.3310.001 *0.011.892
Females41 (66.1)21 (33.9)62 (48.43)
Age (years)13–2320 (30.8)17 (27)37 (28.90)1.6430.650.051.0491.281
24–3437 (56.9)33 (58.7)70 (54.68)1.961
35–456 (9.2)10 (15.8)16 (12.5)1.765
≥462 (3.1)3 (4.7)5 (3.90)0.850
Socioeconomic ClassUpper Class10 (15.4)3 (4.8)13 (10.15)5.8620.05 *0.033.9721.271
Middle Class47 (72.3)56 (88.9)103 (80.4)1.667
Poor8 (12.3)4 (6.3)12 (9.38)0.300
OccupationUnemployed17 (26.2)19 (30.2)36 (28.12)4.4850.4830.041.4320.953
Employed 15 (7.7)8 (12.7)13 (10.15)1.789
Farmer1 (1.5)2 (3.2)3 (2.34)0.569
Student11 (16.9)7 (11.1)18 (14.06)0.503
House wife16 (24.6)9 (14.3)25 (19.53)1.150
Others 214 (21.5)18 (28.6)32 (25)1.118
Educational LevelIlliterate12 (18.5)12 (19)24 (18.75)17.1950.004 *0.03 δ 3.6000.769
Primary school (1–5)5 (7.7)18 (28.6)23 (17.96)1.400
Middle school (6–8)5 (7.7)7 (11.1)12 (9.37)2.00
Secondary/High school (9–10)4 (6.2)8 (12.7)12 (9.37)0.353
Higher secondary school (10–12)17 (26.2)6 (9.5)23 (17.96)0.545
Tertiary (12+)22 (33.8)12 (19)34 (26.56)1.000
Life Satisfaction levelDissatisfied14 (21.5)26 (41.3)40 (31.25)15.7540.0030.020.7690.679
Slightly Dissatisfied14 (21.5)20 (31.7)34 (26.56)0.049
Neutral11 (16.9)1 (1.6)12 (9.37)0.380
Slightly satisfied17 (26.1)12 (19)29 (22.65)0.239
Satisfied9 (13.84)4 (6.3)13 (10.15)1.857
Marital StatusSingle15 (23.1)20 (31.7)35 (27.34)15.3230.002 *0.020.9380.557
Married28 (43.1)35 (55.6)63 (49.21)1.875
Engaged2 (3.1)5 (7.9)8 (6.25)0.113
Widowed20 (30.8)3 (4.8)23 (17.96)1.333
HistoryNo Suicidal Ideations32 (49.2)0 (0)32 (25)29.6330.000002 *0.0050.0000.390
Previous Suicide Attempt----13 (20.6)13 (10.15)323
Self-injurious behavior11 (16.9)25 (39.7)36 (28.125)4.54
Interrupted/Aborted attempts----14 (22.2)14 (10.93)323
Suicidal ideations only22 (33.8)11 (17.5)33 (25.78)0.500
B-H, Benjamini–Hochberg procedure; FDR, False discovery rate (5%); * p value < 0.05; df = degrees of freedom. δ = largest p value, i.e., less than its B-H critical value; 1. Employed includes those on job; 2. Others include merchants, tailors, etc.
Table
Table 2. Comparative assessment of treatment efficacy for different treatment modalities through the C-SSR Scale applied at baseline and after the 3-month follow-up.
Table 2. Comparative assessment of treatment efficacy for different treatment modalities through the C-SSR Scale applied at baseline and after the 3-month follow-up.
Treatment GroupSuicidalityC-SSRSCorrelationPaired t-Test
MeanMDRSig.tSig.
PsychotherapyBaseline5.541.090.230.291.370.183
Follow-up4.45
PharmacotherapyBaseline5.961.570.240.162.930.006
Follow-up4.39
Electroconvulsive therapyBaseline5.642.320.390.043.980.001
Follow-up3.32
Combination therapyBaseline5.82.14−0.220.173.520.001
Follow-up3.65
C-SSRS = Columbia suicide severity rating scale; MD = Mean difference; N = No. of patients.
Table
Table 3. Suicidal ideation and behavior. Comparative assessment of treatment efficacy for different treatment modalities through the C-SSR Scale applied at baseline and after the 3-month follow-up in respective group patients.
Table 3. Suicidal ideation and behavior. Comparative assessment of treatment efficacy for different treatment modalities through the C-SSR Scale applied at baseline and after the 3-month follow-up in respective group patients.
Treatment GroupSuicidal IdeationSuicidal Behavior
Mean
C-SSRS		CorrelationPaired
t-Test		Mean
C-SSRS		CorrelationPaired
t-Test
BFrptpBFrptp
Psychotherapy2.442.550.590.09−0.210.847.695.770.780.006.220.00
Pharmacotherapy3.283.000.080.800.430.687.955.42−0.130.589.040.00
Electroconvulsive therapy3.092.000.710.013.460.017.644.360.740.0013.450.00
Combination therapy4.222.27−0.130.604.510.007.475.120.630.016.140.00
B = Baseline Score, F = Follow-up Scores, p = p-value, r = correlation, t = t-test value.
Table
Table 4. Percentage wise distribution of drug-related problems (DRPs) in the treatment regimen prescribed to suicidal psychotic patients.
Table 4. Percentage wise distribution of drug-related problems (DRPs) in the treatment regimen prescribed to suicidal psychotic patients.
N (%)N (%)
Drug Selection 39 (17.88)
Duplication7 (3.21)
Wrong drug5 (2.29)
Preferred/better choice of drug not given9 (4.12)
Drug should have been ceased18 (8.25)
Dosage-related problems 45 (20.64)
Inappropriate frequency9 (4.12)
Inappropriate duration11 (5.04)
Wrong dose/Dose changed too quickly8 (3.66)
Incorrect or unclear dosing instructions14 (6.42)
Dosage form inappropriateness3 (1.37)
Potential Drug–drug interactions 53 (24.31)
Contraindications apparent2 (0.91)
Minor6 (2.75)
Moderate31 (14.22)
Major14 (6.42)
Adverse Drug Reactions 25 (11.46)
Symptom of an undesirable effect19 (8.71)
Toxicity or allergic events6 (2.75)
Other Problems 56 (25.68)
Incorrect Spelling of trade name9 (4.12)
Inadequate education or counseling47 (21.55)
Table
Table 5. Treatment adherence status shown by included subjects (N = 115) with suicidal ideations and behavior.
Table 5. Treatment adherence status shown by included subjects (N = 115) with suicidal ideations and behavior.
Treatment Adherence StatusSuicidal IdeationSuicidal BehaviorTotal
(N)		χ2dfAsymp. Sig.
(2-Sided)
High Adherence93129.2920.01
Intermediate Adherence531164
Low Adherence211839
Total (N)8332115
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Shahzad, S.; Ullah, S.; Nazar, Z.; Riaz, M.; Khuda, F.; Khalil, A.A.K.; Almutairi, M.H.; Sayed, A.A.; Büyüker, S.M.; Khan, N. Assessment of Contributing Factors and Treatment Practices for Therapeutic Efficacy and Drug-Related Problems in Suicidal Psychotic Patients. Brain Sci. 2022, 12, 543. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12050543

AMA Style

Shahzad S, Ullah S, Nazar Z, Riaz M, Khuda F, Khalil AAK, Almutairi MH, Sayed AA, Büyüker SM, Khan N. Assessment of Contributing Factors and Treatment Practices for Therapeutic Efficacy and Drug-Related Problems in Suicidal Psychotic Patients. Brain Sciences. 2022; 12(5):543. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12050543

Chicago/Turabian Style

Shahzad, Saimon, Sami Ullah, Zahid Nazar, Muhammad Riaz, Fazli Khuda, Atif Ali Khan Khalil, Mikhlid H. Almutairi, Amany A. Sayed, Sultan Mehtap Büyüker, and Nazimuddin Khan. 2022. "Assessment of Contributing Factors and Treatment Practices for Therapeutic Efficacy and Drug-Related Problems in Suicidal Psychotic Patients" Brain Sciences 12, no. 5: 543. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12050543

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop