Another key trial I investigated is a meta-analysis of 150 double-blind trials.(18) A substantial 21 533 people participated across these mostly, short-term trials. The main aim of this study was to compare and contrast the overall effectiveness of 9 second-generation antipsychotics with the first-generation drug, Haloperidol. Due to the limitations of this SSM I will be interpreting results concerning Clozapine and Risperidone exclusively. The comparisons made were regarding efficacy in symptoms, relapse rates, quality of life, side-effects (including EPS and weight gain) and sedation. Both Clozapine and Risperidone had greater efficacy than Haloperidol by 0.52 and 0.13 respectively. This supports the view that second-generation drugs do
…show more content…
Notably, Clozapine was discovered as improving quality of life when juxtaposed with Haloperidol. On the other hand Risperidone failed to make any real improvements. This again highlights the inconsistency of second-generation drugs. Differently, it must be emphasised that a key negative of this meta-analysis is the clear lack of representative data; with only four Risperidone studies and one Clozapine trial. Therefore, this data should not be completely trusted as it cannot be deemed extensive enough. Another vital aspect of this meta-analysis was the review of EPS and its regularlity for each antipsychotic. As many pharmaceutical industries claim it was actually identified that both Clozapine and Risperidone indicated a reduced likelihood of EPS occuring. In 3 studies representing 162 participants it suggested compared to a relative risk of 1.00 for Haloperidol, Clozapine had a significantly reduced 0.17 risk. To further extend this, across 21 studies focusing on 2738 participants Risperidone also had a reduced relative risk of 0.61. This data is crucial as arguably one the main selling points of second-generation antipsychotics is there reduction in side effects including muscle conditions. Unfortunately, despite a reduction in
Notably, Clozapine was discovered as improving quality of life when juxtaposed with Haloperidol. On the other hand Risperidone failed to make any real improvements. This again highlights the inconsistency of second-generation drugs. Differently, it must be emphasised that a key negative of this meta-analysis is the clear lack of representative data; with only four Risperidone studies and one Clozapine trial. Therefore, this data should not be completely trusted as it cannot be deemed extensive enough. Another vital aspect of this meta-analysis was the review of EPS and its regularlity for each antipsychotic. As many pharmaceutical industries claim it was actually identified that both Clozapine and Risperidone indicated a reduced likelihood of EPS occuring. In 3 studies representing 162 participants it suggested compared to a relative risk of 1.00 for Haloperidol, Clozapine had a significantly reduced 0.17 risk. To further extend this, across 21 studies focusing on 2738 participants Risperidone also had a reduced relative risk of 0.61. This data is crucial as arguably one the main selling points of second-generation antipsychotics is there reduction in side effects including muscle conditions. Unfortunately, despite a reduction in