Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T23:40:22.292Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Subjective utility ratings of neuroleptics in treating schizophrenia*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 July 2009

Stephen E. Finn ,
J. Michael Bailey ,
Robert T. Schultz  and
Raymond Faber
Stephen E. Finn*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Texas at Austin; Department of Psychology, Northwestern University; and the Audie L. Murphy Memorial Veterans Hospital and University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, Texas, USA
J. Michael Bailey
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Texas at Austin; Department of Psychology, Northwestern University; and the Audie L. Murphy Memorial Veterans Hospital and University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, Texas, USA
Robert T. Schultz
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Texas at Austin; Department of Psychology, Northwestern University; and the Audie L. Murphy Memorial Veterans Hospital and University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, Texas, USA
Raymond Faber
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Texas at Austin; Department of Psychology, Northwestern University; and the Audie L. Murphy Memorial Veterans Hospital and University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, Texas, USA
*
1Address for correspondence: Dr Stephen E. Finn, Mezes Hall 330, University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712, USA.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Synopsis

This study developed a method for measuring subjective costs and benefits of psychiatric treatments. Forty-one patients rated the relative bothersomeness of symptoms of schizophrenia and side effects of neuroleptics. Thirty-four psychiatrists made parallel ratings from the perspective of the average patient (individual utility) and of the patient's family and society (institutional utility). Psychiatrists predicted patients' ratings moderately well, but misjudged the bothersomeness to patients of 24% of side effects and 20% of symptoms. When considering the patient's perspective, both schizophrenic patients and psychiatrists rated symptoms as no more bothersome than side effects. However, psychiatrists saw side effects as significantly less bothersome than symptoms when considering costs to society. The subjective utility of neuroleptic medications for schizophrenia is most justifiable from an institutional perspective.

Type
Orginal Articles
Information
Psychological Medicine , Volume 20 , Issue 4 , November 1990 , pp. 843 - 848
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Parts of this paper were presented at the meeting of the Society of Biological Psychiatry, 7 13 May 1988, Montreal, Canada.

References

REFERENCES

Baldessarini, R. J. (1985). Chemotherapy in Psychiatry. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Breggin, P. R. (1983). Psychiatric Drugs: Hazards to the Brain. Springer: New York.Google Scholar
Cronbach, L. J. & Gleser, G. C. (1965). Psychological Tests and Personnel Decisions, 2nd edn.University of Illinois Press: Urbana.Google Scholar
Crow, T. R. (1985). The two syndrome concept: origins and current status. Schizophrenia Bulletin 11, 471–485.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Finn, S. E. (1982). Base rates, utilities, and DSM-III: shortcomings of fixed-rules systems of psychodiagnosis. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 91, 294–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, S. C., Nelson, R. O. & Jarrett, R. B. (1987). The treatment utility of assessment: a functional approach to evaluating assessment quality. American Psychologist 42, 963–974.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klein, D. F., Gittleman, R., Quitkin, F. (1980). Diagnosis and Drug Treatment of Psychiatric Disorders: Adults and Children, 2nd edn.Williams & Wilkins: Baltimore.Google Scholar
Meehl, P. E. & Rosen, A. (1955). Antecedent probability and the efficiency of psychometric signs, patterns, or cutting scores. Psychological Bulletin 52, 194–216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rorer, L. G., Hoffman, P. J. & Hsieh, K. C. (1966). Utilities as base-rate multipliers in the determining of optimum cutting scores for the discrimination of groups of unequal size and variance. Journal of Applied Psychology 50, 364–368.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spitzer, R. L., Andreasen, N. C. & Endicott, J. (1978). Schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders in DSM-III. Schizophrenia Bulletin 4, 489–494.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Szasz, T. S. (1957). Some observations on the use of the tranquilizing drugs. Archives of Neurological Psychiatry 77, 86–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Putten, T. (1985). Human Nature and Drug Side-effects: the Anatomy of Non-compliance. Communications Media for Education: Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Van Putten, T. (1974). Why do schizophrenic patients refuse to take their drugs? Archives of General Psychiatry 31, 67–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wing, J. K., Cooper, J. E. & Sartorius, N. (1974). Description and classification of Psychiatric Symptoms: An Instruction Manual for the PSE and the CATEGO Systems. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.Google Scholar