Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40458740›Full record

ArticlePatient preference and adherence2025

One-Year Evaluation of Paliperidone Palmitate 6-Monthly: Satisfaction and Perceived Effectiveness Among Patients, Relatives, and Clinicians.

Sofía Manchado Perero, Ana Rodríguez Lorente, Alba García-Pérez, Guillermo Isidro García, Luis Alberto Forcen-Muñoz, Santiago Ovejero, Rocío Sáez Povedano, Ana Luisa González-Galdámez, Laura Mata Iturralde, Mariluz Ramirez Bonilla and 15 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

25 authors.

Sofía Manchado PereroFundación Jiménez Díaz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Ana Rodríguez LorenteDepartment of Psychiatry, Santa Lucía University Hospital, Cartagena, Murcia, Spain.
Alba García-PérezCentre of Mental Health Molina de Segura, Molina de Segura, Murcia, Spain.ORCID 0009-0009-6639-1896
Guillermo Isidro GarcíaDepartment of Psychiatry, Marqués de Valdecilla University Hospital, Universidad de Cantabria, Santander, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-1954-5196
Luis Alberto Forcen-MuñozCentre of Mental Health Lorca, Lorca, Murcia, Spain.
Santiago OvejeroFundación Jiménez Díaz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Rocío Sáez PovedanoDepartment of Psychiatry, General Hospital de Villarrobledo, Villarrobledo, Albacete, Spain.
Ana Luisa González-GaldámezDepartment of Psychiatry, Los Arcos-Mar Menor University Hospital, San Javier, Murcia, Spain.
Laura Mata IturraldeFundación Jiménez Díaz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Mariluz Ramirez BonillaDepartment of Psychiatry, Marqués de Valdecilla University Hospital, Universidad de Cantabria, Santander, Spain.
Paloma Fuentes-PérezPsychiatry and Mental Health Research Group, Instituto Investigación Sanitaria Valdecilla (IDIVAL), Santander, Spain.
Claudia Ovejas-CatalánPsychiatry and Mental Health Research Group, Instituto Investigación Sanitaria Valdecilla (IDIVAL), Santander, Spain.
Paula Suárez-PinillaDepartment of Psychiatry, Marqués de Valdecilla University Hospital, Universidad de Cantabria, Santander, Spain.
Blanca Fernandez Abascal PuenteDepartment of Psychiatry, Marqués de Valdecilla University Hospital, Universidad de Cantabria, Santander, Spain.
Miguel Omaña ColmenaresDepartment of Psychiatry, Alcanyis General Hospital, Xátiva, Valencia, Spain.
María Pilar Campos-NavarroDepartment of Psychiatry, Santa Lucía University Hospital, Cartagena, Murcia, Spain.
Enrique Baca-GarcíaFundación Jiménez Díaz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Ana Lara FernándezDepartment Psychiatry, Infanta Elena University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Sergio Benavente-LópezDepartment Psychiatry, Infanta Elena University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Alberto Raya PlateroDepartment of Psychiatry, San Cecilio Clinic Hospital, Granada, Spain.
Miguel Barberán NavalónDepartment of Psychiatry, Alcanyis General Hospital, Xátiva, Valencia, Spain.
Sergio Sánchez-AlonsoFundación Jiménez Díaz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-5495-3144
Javier Vázquez-BourgonDepartment of Psychiatry, Marqués de Valdecilla University Hospital, Universidad de Cantabria, Santander, Spain.
Sofia Pappa *West London National Health System (NHS) Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6303-1547
Juan Antonio García-Carmona *Department of Neurology, Santa Lucía University Hospital, Cartagena, Murcia, 30202, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-3938-7698

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Patient satisfaction and perceived treatment effectiveness play a critical role in healthcare outcomes and overall well-being. Understanding patient experiences can help identify barriers to adherence and guide improvements in therapy. Previous studies, such as those conducted with PP3M and PP1M, have highlighted the importance of patient satisfaction in optimizing the management of chronic conditions, demonstrating that satisfaction is linked to better adherence and overall treatment success. Nonetheless, there was no data available with patients treated with paliperidone 6-month (PP6M). Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the perspectives, including the perceived effectiveness and satisfaction of patients, their relatives and mental health professionals on the twice-yearly treatment with PP6M in usual clinical practice. Methods: The cohort of patients derived from the P2Y study. This is a multicenter, prospective study across different sites in Europe. Patients, relatives and psychiatrists were asked for satisfaction, by using the Medication Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ), and perceived effectiveness. We included all patients who were initiated or switched to PP6M and completed one year of treatment. Results: A total of 233 patients were included in this study, of which 9 (4%) discontinued PP6M at 12 months. Most patients were male (69%, 160 participants), 66% (156 patients) carried a diagnosis of schizophrenia and 16% (38 patients) of comorbid substance use disorder. Furthermore, 22% (51 patients), 70% (164 patients) and 8% (19 patients) were treated with PP1M, PP3M and other oral/LAIs antipsychotics, respectively. The majority of patients (81.5%, n = 190/233), relatives/carers (81.1%, n = 189/233) and clinicians (90.9%, n = 212/233) were extremely satisfied, very satisfied or satisfied 1 year after switching from PP1M, PP3M and other antipsychotic to PP6M with similar findings between patients diagnosed with schizophrenia and other diagnoses. Last, 42% of patients, 45% of their relatives and 40% of clinicians perceived PP6M as more effective compared to the previous treatment. In contrast, only 3% of patients, relatives and clinicians perceived PP6M as less effective. Conclusion: Patients, their carers and relatives as well as mental health professionals reported a high satisfaction rate with PP6M, and equally good or even better perceived effectiveness compared to PP1M, PP3M or other oral or LAIs antipsychotics in the majority of cases. Improved patient experience with PP6M could improve treatment continuity and reduce hospitalization rates.

Indexed as

effectivenesslong-acting injectable antipsychoticspaliperidone-palmitate 6-monthlypatient satisfactionpsychiatrists and family perspectivesschizophrenia

Identifiers

PMID40458740
PMCPMC12127522

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.