Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T10:02:31.762Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phenothiazine Side-Effects

Comparison of two major tranquillizers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2018

D. M. Somerville ,
Philip H. Cohen  and
Gwen. D. Graves
D. M. Somerville
Affiliation:
Mont Park Mental Hospital, Victoria, Australia
Philip H. Cohen
Affiliation:
Mont Park Mental Hospital, Victoria, Australia
Gwen. D. Graves
Affiliation:
Mental Health Research Institute, Melbourne
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the six years since Delay and his associates first used chlorpromazine in psychiatry, at least forty-eight separate side-effects have been attributed to the drug. While many of these are minor, and indeed the majority are readily controlled in in-patients, the search for a phenothiazine of therapeutic value equal to or better than chlorpromazine, but with less or no side-effects, is well worth while. In out-patients there are two reasons for taking side-effects seriously. Firstly, they frequently lead to the patient ceasing to take the drug and thus relapse may occur. Secondly, they may be dangerous or even fatal if unreported—for example the signs of agranulocytosis.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Mental Science , Volume 106 , Issue 445 , October 1960 , pp. 1417 - 1424
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1960 

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.)

References

Azima, H., Durost, H., and Arthurs, D., Canad. med. Ass. J., 1959, 31, 549.Google Scholar
Brunold, H., Therap. Umschau., 1959, 16, 90.Google Scholar
Cohen, S., Amer. J. Psychiatr., 1958, 115, 358.Google Scholar
Delay, J., Pichot, P., Lemperière, T., and Elissalde, B., Ann. méd.-psychol., 1959, 117, 724.Google Scholar
Fleeson, W., Glueck, B., Hektad, G., King, J. E., Lykken, D., Meehl, P., and Mena, A., Univ. Minnesota Med. Bull., 1958, 29, 274.Google Scholar
Furtado, D., Rev. neurol., 1959, 100, 763.Google Scholar
Haug, J. O., Tschr. Norske Laegeforg., 1959, 79, 317.Google Scholar
Hippius, H., and Kanig, K., Fortsch. Neur. Psychiat., 1958, 26, 582.Google Scholar
Judah, L., Murphree, O., and Seager, L., Amer. J. Psychiat., 1959, 115, 1118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinross-Wright, J., J. Amer. Med. Ass., 1959, 170, 1283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucero, R. J., and Mayer, B. T., J. Clin. Psych., 1951, 7, 250.Google Scholar
Mayer, K., Medizinische, 1959, 733.Google Scholar
Pollack, B., Amer. J. Psychiat., 1958, 115, 1, 77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Remy, M., Schweiz. med. Wschr., 1958, 88, 1221.Google Scholar
Sauter, T., Praxis, 1959, 48, 140.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.