by Sandra G. Boodman
Kaiser Health News
Adriane Fugh-Berman was stunned by the question: Two graduate students who had no symptoms of mental illness wondered if she thought they should take a powerful schizophrenia drug each had been prescribed to treat insomnia.
"It's a total outrage," said Fugh-Berman, a physician who is an associate professor of pharmacology at Georgetown University. "These kids needed some basic sleep [advice], like reducing their intake of caffeine and alcohol, not a highly sedating drug."
Those Georgetown students exemplify a trend that alarms medical experts, policymakers and patient advocates: the skyrocketing increase in the off-label use of an expensive class of drugs called atypical antipsychotics. Until the past decade these 11 drugs, most approved in the 1990s, had been reserved for the approximately 3 percent of Americans with the most disabling mental illnesses, chiefly schizophrenia and bipolar disorder; more recently a few have been approved to treat severe depression.
But these days atypical antipsychotics -- the most popular are Seroquel, Zyprexa and Abilify -- are being prescribed by psychiatrists and primary-care doctors to treat a panoply of conditions for which they have not been approved, including anxiety, attention-deficit disorder, sleep difficulties, behavioral problems in toddlers and dementia. These new drugs account for more than 90 percent of the market and have eclipsed an older generation of antipsychotics. Two recent reports found that children and adolescents in foster care, some less than a year old, are taking more psychotropic drugs than other children, including those with the severest forms of mental illness.
In 2010 antipsychotic drugs racked up more than $16 billion in sales, according to IMS Health, a firm that tracks drug trends for the health-care industry. For the past three years they have ranked near or at the top of the best-selling classes of drugs, outstripping antidepressants and sometimes cholesterol medicines. A study published last year found that off-label antipsychotic prescriptions doubled between 1995 and 2008, from 4.4 million to 9 million. And a recent report by pharmacy benefits manager Medco estimated that the prevalence of the drugs' use among adults ballooned more than 169 percent between 2001 and 2010.
Critics say the popularity of atypical antipsychotics reflects a combination of hype that the expensive medicines, which can cost $500 per month, are safer than the earlier generation of drugs; hope that they will work for a variety of ailments when other treatments have not; and aggressive marketing by drug companies to doctors and patients.
"Antipsychotics are overused, overpriced and oversold," said Allen Frances, former chair of psychiatry at Duke University School of Medicine, who headed the task force that wrote the DSM-IV, psychiatry's diagnostic bible. While judicious off-label use may be appropriate for those who have not responded to other treatments for, say, severe obsessive-compulsive disorder, Frances said the drugs, which are designed to calm patients and to moderate the hallucinations and delusions of psychosis, are being used "promiscuously, recklessly," often to control behavior and with little regard for their serious side effects. These include major, rapid weight gain -- 40 pounds is not uncommon -- Type 2 diabetes, breast development in boys, irreversible facial tics and, among the elderly, an increased risk of death.
The Latest Fad?
Doctors are allowed to prescribe drugs for unapproved uses, but companies are forbidden to promote them for such purposes. In the past few years major drugmakers have paid more than $2 billion to settle lawsuits brought by states and the federal government alleging illegal marketing; some cases are still being litigated, as are thousands of claims by patients. In 2009 Eli Lilly and Co. paid the federal government a record $1.4 billion to settle charges that it illegally marketed Zyprexa through, among other things, a "5 at 5 campaign" that urged nursing homes to administer 5 milligrams of the drug at 5 p.m. to induce sleep.
Wayne Blackmon, a psychiatrist and lawyer who teaches at George Washington University Law School, said he commonly sees patients taking more than one antipsychotic, which raises the risk of side effects. Blackmon regards them as the "drugs du jour," too often prescribed for "problems of living. Somehow doctors have gotten it into their heads that this is an acceptable use." Physicians, he said, have a financial incentive to prescribe drugs, widely regarded as a much quicker fix than a time-intensive evaluation and nondrug treatments such as behavior therapy, which might not be covered by insurance.
In a series in the New York Review of Books last year, Marcia Angell, former editor in chief of the New England Journal of Medicine, argued that the apparent "raging epidemic of mental illness" partly reflects diagnosis creep: the expansion of the elastic boundaries that define mental illnesses to include more people, which enlarges the market for psychiatric drugs.
"You can't push a drug if people don't think they have a disease," said Fugh-Berman, who directs PharmedOut, a Georgetown program that educates doctors about drug marketing and promotion. "How do you normalize the use of antipsychotics? By using key opinion leaders to emphasize their use and through CMEs (continuing medical education) and ghost-written articles in medical journals," which, she said "affect the whole information stream."
James H. Scully Jr., medical director of the American Psychiatric Association, sees the situation differently. He agrees that misuse of the drugs is a problem and says that off-label prescribing should be based on some evidence of effectiveness. But Scully suggests that a key factor driving use of the drugs, in addition to "intense marketing and some effectiveness," is the growing number of non-psychiatrists prescribing them. Many lack the expertise and experience necessary to properly diagnose and treat mental health problems, he said.
Among psychiatrists, use of antipsychotics is rooted in a desire to heal, according to Scully. "All of the meds we use have their limits. If you're trying to help somebody, you think, 'What else might I be able to do for them?' "
Since 2005, antipsychotics have carried a black-box warning, the strongest possible, cautioning against their use in elderly patients with dementia, because the drugs increase the risk of death. In 2008 the Food and Drug Administration reiterated its earlier warning, noting that "antipsychotics are not indicated for the treatment of dementia-related psychosis." But experts say such use remains widespread.
In one Northern California nursing home in 2006 and 2007, 22 residents, many suffering from dementia, were given antipsychotics for the convenience of the staff or because the residents refused to go to the dining room. In some cases the drugs were forcibly injected, state officials said. Three residents died.
A 2011 report by the inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services found that in a six-month period in 2007, 14 percent of nursing home residents were given antipsychotics. In one case a patient with an undetected urinary-tract infection was given the drugs to control agitation.
"The primary reason is that there's not enough staff," said Toby S. Edelman, senior policy attorney for the Center for Medicare Advocacy, a Washington-based nonprofit group, who recently testified about the problem before the Senate Special Committee on Aging. "If you can't tie people up, you give 'em a drug" she said, referring to restrictions on the use of physical restraints in nursing homes.
Drugs At 18 Months
Nursing home residents aren't the only ones gobbling antipsychotics.
Mark E. Helm, a Little Rock pediatrician who was a medical director of Arkansas's Medicaid evidence-based prescription drug program from 2004 to 2010, said he had seen 18-month-olds being given potent antipsychotic drugs for bipolar disorder, an illness he said rarely develops before adolescence. Antipsychotics, which he characterized as the fastest-growing and most expensive class of drugs covered by the state's Medicaid program, were typically prescribed to children to control disruptive behavior, which often stemmed from their impoverished, chaotic or dysfunctional families, Helm said. "Sedation is the key reason these meds get used," he observed.
More than any other factor, experts agree, the explosive growth in the diagnosis of pediatric bipolar disorder has fueled antipsychotic use among children. Between 1994 and 2003, reported diagnoses increased 40-fold, from about 20,000 to approximately 800,000, according to Columbia University researchers.
That diagnosis, popularized by several prominent child psychiatrists in Boston who claimed that extreme irritability, inattention and mood swings were actually pediatric bipolar disorder that can occur before age 2, has undergone a reevaluation in recent years. The reasons include the highly publicized death of a 4-year-old girl in Massachusetts, who along with her two young siblings had been taking a cocktail of powerful drugs for several years to treat bipolar disorder; the revelation of more than $1 million in unreported drug company payments to the leading proponent of the diagnosis; and growing doubts about its validity.
Helm said that antipsychotics, which he believes have become more socially acceptable, serve another purpose: as a gateway to mental health services. "To get a child qualified for SSI disability, it is helpful to have a child on a medicine," he said, referring to the federal program that assists families of children who are disabled by illness.
Ask Your Doctor
Psychiatrist David J. Muzina, a national practice leader at pharmacy benefits manager Medco, said he believes direct-to-consumer advertising has helped fuel rising use of the drugs. As former director of the mood disorders center at the Cleveland Clinic, he encountered patients who asked for antipsychotics by name, citing a TV commercial or print ad.
Some states are attempting to rein in their use and cut escalating costs. Texas has announced it will not allow a child younger than 3 to receive antipsychotics without authorization from the state. Arkansas now requires parents to give informed consent before a child receives an anti-psychotic drug. The federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services announced it is summoning state officials to a meeting this summer to address the use of antipsychotics in foster care. And Sens. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.) and Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) introduced legislation that would require doctors who prescribe antipsychotics off-label to nursing home patients to complete forms certifying that they are appropriate.
Medco is asking doctors to document that they have performed diabetes tests in patients taking the drugs. "Our intention here is to get doctors to reexamine prescriptions," Muzina said.
"In the short term, I don't see a change in this trend unless external forces intervene."
Related stories:
Mom's last resort: Opiate antidote saves young people's lives
Work burnout tied to stress eating in women


Only a couple Psychiatrists of course speak out in this vein, which include Thomas Szasz and Peter Breggin. The rest of 'em are all IN on the charade of "diagnostic creep" in formulating the DSM books--which are nothing more than tools to get the Pharmaceutical Industry paid and paid well. The hospital and pharmaceutical industry do not care about a damn thing--including the very laws they are supposed to live under, including Psychiatrists. So the end result is the last industry in the never-ending battle for civil and human rights of man, and while Obama is compared to Martin Luther King, he and his administration is AWOL on these issues, Eric Holder is just a place holder it seems. The media, save for this article, always offers some connection, knee-jerk, in connection with violent and criminal acts with so-called mental illness(which is conceptually and scientifically mainly a sham and a scam) and somehow now the latest is this soldier who gunned down 16 civilians in Afghanistan. It seems neither the media, nor the Psychiatric-Pharamaceutical-Hospital Megalopoly Industries is interested in telling the truth in this regard, except when some so-called expert comes out with an opinion as here....shameful.
it seems as we normalize those with bipolar disorder, borderline personality disorder and severe depression everyone else needs to take medications to deal with the behavior of those who have not clue one about what appropriate behavior in life would even look like...
We've reached a point where physicians are using potentially problem drugs rather than let someone suffer a little pain. Whether it's lawsuit worry or society or greed, I don't know.
I appreciated the fact that when I had Achilles tendon surgery, my surgeon prescribed exactly 3 percocets "to be taken ONLY if you need them for pain relief to get to sleep the first three nights after surgery. If you have pain on the fourth night, take Tylenol and deal with it."
The Mick- Wished I'd had your surgeon. I cut the tendon completely in my thumb. My surgeon gave me 3 different medications so I was taking a pill every 2 hrs for about about 6 weeks. My entire right hand was immobilized the entire time and it was dificult and painful to do anything incluing sleep. Then cutoff the percocet cold turkey. Ended up with severe pain in my hand. Then surgeon put me on a high dose of nuerontin. 300mg 3 times a day. That lasted 3 days and it messed me up so much I couldn't take it. Called him and was told to just stop taking it then. First he should have started me slowly on this drug leading up to the high dose and should not have had me just quit taking it. Ended up with severe complex regional pain syndrome which ended up effecting both hands, feet and legs. For awhile I couldn't stand sheets touching me and taking a shower was torture as the water hitting me was painful. CRPS has a side effect of making you have extreme sensitivity to touch. Anyway the point is this surgeon wasnt qualified to manage my medications and 4 years and multiple specialists later I am still suffering and bascially will have to deal with this for a lfetime as the surgeon should have handed me to the correct type of Dr. immeadiately instead of bailing on me when his decisions made my problems worse. If he'd done so I probably would have recovered. I still can't use my thumb so the entire surgery was a total waste that has cost me more than just money. And no I didn't sue him. Later the whole physicians practice he was in dissolved as he wasn't the only incompetent Dr. in it and others damaged their patients as well and did get sued. They opened under a different name and must have kept up the good work as that business is shut down as well.
...This is not`Oh my gosh! news. I was though surprised to read about the large scale on which this is occurring...the money made and sadly the number of `trained' MDs involved in this practice. So it seems anyone who can pay the co-pay is just another Michael Jackson waiting for their own tragedy....and I see that many other comments reflect this perception/interpretation as well.
My mother suffered from dementia-related psychosis. Low doses of Zyprexa vastly improved her happiness and quality of life, and reduced the danger she posed to herself and to me, her full time caregiver. Yes, it increased her risk of diabetes and stroke. Not being on it increased her risk of jumping out of the car while it was moving. She didn't have to unlock it to open it, and she refused to sit in the back seat, where the safety locks were. Try getting an able bodied Alzheimers patient during the aggressive phase of the disease to do something she doesn't want to do. You won't get far. It's all very well to make flippant remarks like "gobbling antipsychotics" and a different thing altogether to offer viable alternatives to psychotic dementia patients. I asked a professional what would happen if she went completely over the edge and became dangerous to herself or me to the point where I could do nothing to help her, and I was told she would be taken to a hospital and given drugs to stabilize her. In short, the only options were drugs or strapping her to a bed. Drugs were more humane as they enabled her to get out of the house with me, go to the park and small restaurants and to the mall, go for drives along the beach, and have warm, loving conversations. That was worth the tiny increased risk of stroke.
But how old was she?
The problem being addressed here is more of a targeting against college and graduate students or even children that allegedly "act out" or differently than others, either their peers or their parents become overly cautious.
Many Americans have lost touch with society expectations and norms, so much so that a pill is thrown out as a solution instead of doing what is healthy.
I'm fed up with it.
I'll tell you as a law student - we get no days off for 4 years - none. The curriculum doesn't allow it to complete the degree program effectively and to permit a reasonable schedule. So, though most law students do not go out and party, that doesn't mean they are being anti-social. But, most people believe that and start rumors. Same with many college kids - they've got to study to pass and they can't do that if they are out all the time socializing. It is the rumor mills online that cause this harmful defamation to start spreading around that certain students are "crazy" or "not normal".
No - they are normal, but applying themselves to their work.
And this is far different than treating the elderly, which we can never compromise, but also remaining cautious to not overmedicate which occurs all the time.
many people want a quick fix to their problems in this rushed, multi-tasking never fast enough era. Slow down, make priorities as to what is really important. I feel many prescription drugs do far more damage to the brain than studies may show. They should only be prescribed to those with serious illness who truly need them.
I tend to agree.
Often, aspirin takes care of pain very well. But, like all medications when we overuse them our bodies build immunity to the effective pain-relieving substances. Then some people start looking for more powerful substances to alleviate pain. Sometimes the most effective remedy is to get up and move around.
I witnessed my mother's physician use her as a human guinea pig, trying new medications to treat her symptoms. At one time and while I was living in another state raising my family, my mother was subjected to as many as 30 different medications. When she told me this I ordered her doctor to list all that she took and mail that list to me so that I could confirm that she actually needed all of them.
He eventually reduced the drugs down by half.
I was furious. Her entire appearance changed while being poisoned by that unnecessary medication.
The human body has a miraculous method of healing that usually should only be aided, but that natural correction shouldn't be supplanted synthetically.
Try looking at cchr.org for the real issue of mental health. Drugs are way over prescribed. Has no one noticed the drug stores popping up on every corner and no mom and pop kind either. They are making some serious money on our insurance pograms, medicare and medicaid. Drug pushers on every corner, isn't it about just say no and the war on drugs? I had a cocktail of drugs that about cost me everything. In the middle of a sentence I just fell out. I was told by a published doctor the reason I was prescribed those drugs was for the facility to make it look as if I had an illegal drug problem(isurance would cover more) and I'm not talking about pot, the hard kind. That facility was known for that and they still are in existance eight years later, why? If psychiatry doesn't police itself, how can we take them seriously?
What's in my medicine cabinet?
Xanax, Klonopin, Vistaril, Tegretol, Meclizine, Lortab 10's, Flexeril and Hydroclorothiazide.
What do I take daily? Hydroclorothiazide.
This whole subject makes me so upset, how can we justify giving a one year old child these kinds of med's, this is just sick!!
Having worked in the mental health field for over 25 years and passing out hundreds of pills to patients I feel that doctors are too quick to prescribe meds to people just because they may feel a little depressed or stressed out a little, antipsychotic drugs can have severe side effects... . Drugs companies are profiting on common ailments by making them a disease. Take for instance menopause, it's a normal part of aging but now they have pills for every symptom, the same goes for osteoporosis which is another aspect of aging, it's now treated as a disease.
I'm aware that the article is bringing attention to the prescription of these drugs to people who do not need them, but I do just want to point out that sometimes these drugs can change your life for the better.
My stepson has been taking the anti-psychotic Risperidone since he was 7 years old. He is on the autism spectrum and for the most part non-verbal. He became very violent after a big transition in which he came to live full-time with us. He was looking to be expelled from his school and bussed 45 minutes to a school that would be able to control his "meltdowns." During his meltdowns he would intentionally run head first into walls and strike, spit and kick whoever/whatever was in his way.
Since he has been on this medication, he was able to stay in school, his violent outbursts all but vanished, and we found that he was able transition a lot more smoothly than before. We were reluctant to medicate him for fear of side effects and also because we did not want him to be lethargic in any way. Today he is 9 years old. he knows how he feels on the medication and comes looking for us when it is time to take it. I truly believe that he knows it calms him down. While he may not be able to verbally express his feelings, he is a sympathetic and loving boy. If he accidently bumps heads with you, he'll show remorse, kiss you and say he's sorry. He's come a long way and I truly believe that the anti-psychotic saved our lives.
That said, my stepson is one of those cases that truly needed that medication. Shame on people who take medication for no apparent reason other than to numb their everyday anxieties.
Working in the Medicaid arena I do see that Seroquel (for instance... ) is often written for insomnia. Isn't this just a small part of the overall bigger problem in Medicaid costs -- that taxpayers have the financial burden to pay for? I know for a fact that primary care providers understand that parts of the Oregon Health Plan will not even pay for a generic prescription such as zolpidem tartrate for "insomnia" because insomnia is not a covered diagnosis -- BUT they can write for antipsychotics or other mental health drugs which are "carved out" and paid for by the State of Oregon and potentially will be paid by the State of Oregon -- aka, Oregon taxpayers. This is just an example of a small piece of the high cost pie that potentially applies to every State. Lack of physican responsibility because they don't know or really care how much these meds cost?? That is a very common response... or maybe like a "drug rep's influence". Seems to me if just basic, common-sense thinking would prevail in the health care industry, we would save millions of dollars with little effort.
Mary- you have a good point to an extent. My nephew had a hernia that needed surgery but OHP wouldn't pay for it. He had 4 children, couldn't work and couldn't lift more than 10 pounds for the real possibilty of life threatening problems if the hernia ruptured. The phyicians after fighting to get the surgery for some time gave up and finally listed the surgery for a different purpose and got it approved. But only after many months and suffering on my nephews part. The sad part was he had to be out of work and on assistance for a considerable amount of time that would only have been about 2 months if the surgery had been approved in the 1st place.
MDs should not be permitted to prescribe these drugs, that's the job of a Psychiatrist working together with a Psychologist. You need both componets for succesful treatment. One prescribes and monitors meds, the other teaches you how to cope.
MDs who prescribe these meds should be fined.
'Chill pills' are hip these days and the med profession is making gold.
This is part of why there's this war on drugs, giving new meaning to 'Mother's little helper, dope the kid.
It wasn't until I was 45 years old that I first learned of a mother that did that to her children, dispensing cough syrup as a sort of tranquilizer to her kids. I reported her. But, being the naive person I was, never remotely thought of that because I was always so careful in dispensing medication to my children and only if they needed it, stopping immediately once they no longer needed it - as directed, which I believe most parents do.
But, incredible that a parent would knowingly do that.
Pills do not solve a problem. The simply mask it. Alcohol and/or canabis do the same. If you want to feel different, do something different and quit thinking about how YOU feel.
I really like your comment.
I work in a prison. A big percentage of prisoner's have mental disorders; a lot of those drugs keep me safe!
You have my sympathy. Prisons are the most violent places in the country.
I worked with the criminally insane also and 99% of them do need to be medicated, but prisons and mental hospitals are a controlled environment and if it wasn't for the high doses of these meds along with restraints I would have been badly injured or dead years ago. These meds are not for the general public to use and doctors shouldn't be prescribing them.
It is my opinion that mental hospitals and prisons need to greatly improve their safety standards for inmates and staff. Being stabbed by deranged inmates does not appeal to me. Inmates who assault staff should receive electroshock therapy. Inmates who kill staff should be electrocuted.
Antipsychotics are not overused in some cases. Most members of Congress need to be on more.
Attorney Blackmon fails to recognize the heavy reliance that justices place on often incompetent psychologists as expert witnesses who mislabel or attach false and defamatory accusations to otherwise peaceful persons that have no mental illness at all but the testimony was spoken in malice.
These things really do occur and at an alarming rate.
But - you all just keep your heads in the sand. It'll all go away and Mr. Obama will sweep it under the rug if he is nominated again, I'm sure.
Keep up the good work of denying and depriving your fellow citizens and knocking them to the street when you no longer wish to deal with them, America.
"Home of the Brave"
When these people then can't get off these drugs since they will have no skills to cope with daily challenges they then will be deemed disabled and will have medical reports to prove it and will go on the public doles for life have a few kids and they get more money. Yeah thats the answer that America needs to send to our young adults.
I'd like to see that happen. I'm an adult with 3 adult kids and 1 under-aged kid, worked all of my life, applied for disability due to 5 different problems deeming me unable to work. That was 3 years ago and I'm waiting on a hearing for 2 years now. I wouldn't be living off of YOUR money at all. I've never HEARD of anybody doing this but if they are, they're making it WORSE for me!
This isn't funny OR a joking matter to me!