The Role of Antipsychotics in the Management of Anxiety Disorders: An Evidence-Based Clinical Review

Section 1: Introduction – A Paradigm of Off-Label Practice

The Clinical Landscape

Anxiety disorders represent one of the most prevalent classes of mental health conditions globally, imposing a significant burden on individuals and healthcare systems.¹

The standard of care involves evidence-based psychotherapies, such as Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT), and pharmacotherapy, primarily with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) or serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs).³

While these first-line treatments are effective for many, a substantial portion of patients—estimated between 15% and 40%—do not achieve a satisfactory response, defined as a 50% improvement in symptoms.³

This leaves a large population with treatment-resistant or refractory anxiety, a clinical challenge that compels practitioners to explore alternative and adjunctive therapeutic strategies.⁷

The Rise of Off-Label Antipsychotic Use

In response to this therapeutic need, the past two decades have witnessed a significant and well-documented increase in the “off-label” prescription of antipsychotic medications for anxiety disorders.¹

This trend is particularly pronounced for the second-generation, or “atypical,” antipsychotics (SGAs).

Data analyzing psychiatrist visits between 1996-1999 and 2004-2007 revealed that the proportion of visits for an anxiety disorder that resulted in an antipsychotic prescription nearly doubled, from 10.6% to 21.3%.⁷

This escalation is not monolithic; prescriptions for SGAs for anxiety rose by nearly 17% during this period, while those for first-generation antipsychotics (FGAs) decreased.⁷

Several factors appear to drive this trend.

Foremost is the clinical imperative to find effective options for patients who have not benefited from conventional treatments.⁷

Beyond this, however, other dynamics are at play.

A clinical focus on rapid symptom reduction, particularly for distressing symptoms like agitation and insomnia, may favor the use of SGAs, many of which possess potent sedative properties.⁷

Furthermore, some clinicians perceive SGAs as a preferable long-term alternative to benzodiazepines, citing concerns about the latter’s potential for dependence, cognitive side effects, and withdrawal syndromes.⁷

This confluence of factors has led to a cultural shift within clinical psychiatry, where the use of a high-risk medication class has become an increasingly normalized option for a common, non-psychotic condition.

This practice has evolved not in response to a wealth of high-quality clinical trial data, but rather has significantly outpaced the development of a mature evidence base, creating a feedback loop where increased use fosters greater acceptance, which in turn drives further use.

The Core Dilemma

This growing clinical practice creates a profound dilemma.

With the singular exception of the FGA trifluoperazine, which is approved for the short-term treatment of non-psychotic anxiety but not as an initial therapy, virtually no antipsychotic medication holds regulatory approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the primary treatment of any anxiety disorder.¹

This disconnect places clinical pragmatism in direct tension with the principles of evidence-based medicine.

The tension is amplified by the considerable and well-documented risk profile of these medications, which includes the potential for severe and irreversible neurological, metabolic, and cardiovascular adverse effects.⁶

Report Objective and Structure

This report aims to provide a comprehensive, multi-faceted, and critical analysis of the use of antipsychotics in the management of anxiety disorders.

It will move beyond a simple summary of existing data to synthesize the neurobiological rationale for their use, critically appraise the quality and findings of the available efficacy evidence, conduct a thorough risk-benefit analysis, review the current state of clinical guidelines and prescribing practices, provide a comparative analysis against other therapeutic modalities, and integrate the crucial perspective of patient-lived experience.

The objective is to produce a definitive resource that can inform clinical decision-making, guide future research, and foster a more judicious and evidence-based approach to this complex therapeutic issue.

Section 2: Neurobiological Mechanisms – From Psychosis to Anxiolysis

The therapeutic action of antipsychotics in psychotic disorders is primarily attributed to their effects on dopamine neurotransmission.

However, their potential utility in anxiety disorders stems from a much broader and more complex pharmacological profile, particularly among the second-generation agents.

Understanding this profile is key to appreciating both their putative anxiolytic effects and their extensive side-effect burden.

Core Antipsychotic Mechanism

Antipsychotics are broadly categorized into two classes based on their primary mechanism of action and receptor binding profiles.

First-Generation Antipsychotics (FGAs)

Also known as “typical” antipsychotics, agents such as haloperidol and trifluoperazine exert their effects primarily through potent antagonism of the dopamine D2 receptor.¹⁶

This strong blockade in the brain’s mesolimbic pathway is highly effective in reducing the positive symptoms of psychosis (e.g., hallucinations, delusions).

However, this same mechanism in other dopamine pathways, such as the nigrostriatal pathway, is responsible for their high propensity to cause acute extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) and the potentially irreversible movement disorder, tardive dyskinesia (TD).¹⁶

Second-Generation Antipsychotics (SGAs)

The “atypical” agents, which include quetiapine, olanzapine, and risperidone, are defined by a more complex mechanism.

Their signature action is a combined antagonism of serotonin 5-HT2A and dopamine D2 receptors.¹⁶

It is theorized that potent 5-HT2A blockade modulates dopamine release, particularly in the nigrostriatal and mesocortical pathways.

This may contribute to a lower risk of EPS compared to FGAs at clinically effective doses and may also confer benefits for the negative and cognitive symptoms of schizophrenia.¹⁷

The Putative Anxiolytic Pathways

The anxiolytic effect of antipsychotics, particularly SGAs, is not fully elucidated but is believed to arise from their multimodal action across several neurotransmitter systems, extending far beyond simple dopamine blockade.²⁰

• Dopamine Modulation: While dopamine hyperactivity is central to psychosis, dopamine pathways are also integral to motivation, reward processing, and the regulation of emotion.²¹ The modulation of these pathways, particularly in the prefrontal cortex, may contribute to a reduction in anxiety symptoms.
• Serotonin Modulation: Dysregulation of the serotonin system is a cornerstone of the neurobiology of anxiety and depressive disorders.²³ SGAs exert powerful effects on this system, most notably through potent 5-HT2A receptor antagonism. Some agents and their metabolites also demonstrate partial agonism at the 5-HT1A receptor, an action associated with anxiolytic and antidepressant effects.²⁰ This provides a mechanistic overlap with SSRIs, though the mode of action is distinct (receptor blockade/modulation versus reuptake inhibition).
• Antihistaminic and Antiadrenergic Actions: A defining feature of many SGAs is their potent antagonism at other receptors. Strong blockade of the histamine H1 receptor is responsible for the profound sedative effects of drugs like quetiapine and olanzapine.²⁵ In clinical practice, this sedation is often perceived as a direct anxiolytic effect, especially in patients whose anxiety manifests with significant insomnia or agitation. Antagonism at the alpha-1 adrenergic receptor can also contribute to calming and hypotensive effects.²⁶

This diverse receptor profile means that SGAs do not act as a targeted tool but rather as a broad-spectrum modulator of central nervous system activity.

While first-line agents like SSRIs perform a targeted adjustment by selectively increasing the availability of serotonin, and benzodiazepines perform a targeted amplification of the brain’s primary inhibitory neurotransmitter, GABA, SGAs initiate a system-wide reboot.

They simultaneously block multiple, functionally distinct receptor systems, including dopamine, serotonin, histamine, acetylcholine, and norepinephrine.

This non-specific, broad-spectrum dampening of neuronal signaling explains both their potential efficacy in complex, agitated states and their extensive, multi-system side effect profile, which impacts metabolic, neurological, and cardiovascular function.

Specific Agent Profiles

The SGAs most commonly used for anxiety have distinct pharmacological fingerprints that influence their clinical effects.

• Quetiapine: This agent has a relatively low affinity for the D2 receptor and dissociates from it rapidly, a “kiss and run” mechanism that is thought to account for its comparatively low risk of EPS.²⁵ Its therapeutic effects in mood and anxiety disorders are likely mediated by a combination of 5-HT2A antagonism, 5-HT1A partial agonism, and, crucially, the actions of its primary active metabolite, norquetiapine. Norquetiapine acts as a potent norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (NRI), giving quetiapine a unique pharmacological profile that combines antipsychotic, antidepressant, and anxiolytic mechanisms.²⁵
• Olanzapine: A potent D2 and 5-HT2A antagonist, olanzapine also exhibits strong blockade of histamine H1, adrenergic alpha-1, and muscarinic M1 receptors.²⁹ This broad receptor engagement results in a rebalancing of dopamine and serotonin systems that can improve mood and behavior, while its antihistaminic and anticholinergic actions contribute to significant sedation and a high risk of metabolic side effects.³²
• Risperidone: Characterized by very potent D2 and 5-HT2A antagonism, risperidone also has a high affinity for alpha-1 and alpha-2 adrenergic receptors.²⁷ Its action at adrenergic receptors may contribute to its efficacy in reducing anxiety and agitation.²⁷ Unlike olanzapine and quetiapine, it has minimal affinity for muscarinic receptors but is the most likely of the common SGAs to cause hyperprolactinemia due to its potent D2 blockade in the tuberoinfundibular pathway.³⁴

The following table summarizes the key pharmacological differences between these agents, providing a framework for understanding their distinct clinical profiles.

Drug	Primary Mechanism	D2 Affinity	5-HT2A Affinity	H1 Affinity (Sedation)	Alpha-1 Affinity (Hypotension)	M1 Affinity (Anticholinergic)
Quetiapine	5-HT2A/D2 Antagonist, NRI (via metabolite)	Low	Moderate	High	Moderate	Low
Olanzapine	D2/5-HT2A Antagonist	High	Very High	Very High	High	High
Risperidone	D2/5-HT2A Antagonist	Very High	Very High	Moderate	Very High	Very Low
Aripiprazole	D2/5-HT1A Partial Agonist, 5-HT2A Antagonist	High (Partial Agonist)	High	Moderate	Moderate	Very Low
Data synthesized from.16

Section 3: A Critical Appraisal of the Evidence for Efficacy

While a neurobiological rationale exists for the use of antipsychotics in anxiety, the transition from pharmacological theory to clinical evidence reveals a landscape characterized by a scarcity of high-quality data and significant methodological limitations.

A critical examination of the literature shows that the strong prescribing trend is built upon a surprisingly fragile evidence base.

The Overall Evidence Landscape: An Umbrella Review

The highest level of evidence synthesis comes from a recent umbrella review that aggregated the findings of 25 separate systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the topic.¹²

The conclusions of this comprehensive review are sobering and fundamentally challenge the routine use of these agents for anxiety.

The most critical finding relates to the quality of the underlying research.

Using the AMSTAR-2 scale, a validated tool for assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews, the authors determined that the vast majority of the included reviews were of “low” or “critically low” quality.¹²

Only a single review met the criteria for high quality.

This indicates that the existing body of synthesized evidence is fraught with potential biases and methodological flaws, making it difficult to draw firm conclusions.

The umbrella review found there was insufficient evidence to meaningfully compare antipsychotic monotherapy with established first-line treatments for anxiety, citing flawed experimental designs and small sample sizes in the primary studies.¹²

The overarching conclusion was a clear and significant “lack of high-quality studies of antipsychotics in anxiety disorders”.¹²

Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD): The Quetiapine Exception

The single most robust pocket of evidence for an antipsychotic in any anxiety disorder is for the use of quetiapine in Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD).⁶

Several large, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials have evaluated both immediate-release (IR) and extended-release (XR) formulations of quetiapine as monotherapy for GAD.⁴¹

A pooled analysis of three such trials demonstrated that quetiapine XR, at doses of 50 mg/day and 150 mg/day, was statistically superior to placebo in reducing scores on the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) at 8 weeks.³⁹

Furthermore, some studies included an active comparator arm, finding that the efficacy of quetiapine was comparable to that of established antidepressants like paroxetine and escitalopram.⁴¹

However, this evidence is not without significant caveats.

Despite the positive trial results, which were largely industry-sponsored, the FDA’s Psychopharmacologic Drugs Advisory Committee (PDAC) reviewed the data and concluded that quetiapine was not acceptably safe for use as a monotherapy for GAD, effectively halting its path to regulatory approval for this indication.¹³

Clinical experts and review authors consistently advise caution, noting that the potential benefits must be weighed against the drug’s poor tolerability and the risk of serious long-term adverse effects.⁶

Augmentation Strategies for Treatment-Resistant Anxiety

The most common clinical rationale for prescribing an SGA for anxiety is as an augmentation agent for patients who have not responded to an antidepressant.

Here, the evidence is mixed and conflicting.

• Olanzapine: One small, placebo-controlled study investigated olanzapine augmentation for patients with GAD who remained symptomatic after six weeks of treatment with fluoxetine 20 mg/day. The study found that adding olanzapine (at a mean dose of 8.7 mg/day) resulted in a significantly greater proportion of treatment responders compared to adding placebo.¹³ However, this benefit was accompanied by clinically significant weight gain.¹³
• Risperidone: Evidence for risperidone augmentation is weaker, primarily coming from an open-label trial. In this study, low-dose risperidone (mean dose 1.12 mg/day) was added to the regimen of patients with refractory panic disorder, social anxiety disorder, or GAD. The results showed a significant reduction in anxiety symptoms over 8 weeks.⁴⁵ While suggestive, the open-label design is susceptible to placebo effects and observer bias and cannot establish efficacy.
• Contradictory Meta-Analysis: A critical piece of evidence comes from a 2016 systematic review and meta-analysis that specifically examined augmentation strategies across six randomized controlled trials for treatment-resistant anxiety disorders.⁴⁶ In direct contrast to the findings of smaller individual studies, this meta-analysis concluded that augmentation was
  not associated with an increased likelihood of response (the primary outcome) when compared with placebo. While a small, statistically significant effect was observed in the reduction of symptom severity (a secondary outcome), the failure to improve the rate of overall response challenges the fundamental premise of this widely used clinical strategy.⁴⁶

Evidence in Other Anxiety-Spectrum Disorders

Beyond GAD, the evidence for antipsychotics becomes even more sparse and disorder-specific.

• Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD): There is moderate evidence supporting the use of risperidone as an augmenting agent for patients with OCD who are refractory to SSRIs. One analysis found that adding risperidone was associated with a 3.9-fold greater likelihood of a favorable response compared to placebo.³⁹ Olanzapine has also been frequently prescribed off-label for OCD, though the controlled evidence is less robust.⁷
• Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD): Observational data indicate that quetiapine and risperidone are the most commonly prescribed antipsychotics for traumatic stress disorders.⁷ Some evidence from older, less well-designed studies suggests that augmentation with these agents may be superior to placebo.⁴⁷
• Panic Disorder (PD): The evidence base for using SGAs in panic disorder is described as limited to poor.⁶ One study that examined risperidone monotherapy in patients with bipolar disorder and a comorbid anxiety disorder found it was no more effective than placebo and, concerningly, appeared to worsen anxiety symptoms in the subgroup of patients who also had panic disorder.¹³

Taken together, the clinical evidence for antipsychotics in anxiety is weak, inconsistent, and likely overstated.

The overall evidence base is undermined by the poor methodological quality of the majority of studies.

The strongest signal, for quetiapine in GAD, is tempered by a negative regulatory decision and significant safety concerns.

The widespread practice of augmentation is directly challenged by a meta-analysis showing no benefit on the primary outcome of response.

This discrepancy suggests that the perceived efficacy in clinical settings may be an inflation of a weak true signal, confounded by factors such as the potent sedative effects of these drugs being misinterpreted as true anxiolysis, and a potential publication bias favoring smaller, positive, industry-funded trials over larger, more critical analyses.

Section 4: The Risk-Benefit Calculus – A Comprehensive Profile of Adverse Effects

The decision to prescribe any medication involves a careful weighing of its potential benefits against its potential harms.

For antipsychotics in the context of non-psychotic anxiety, this calculus is particularly stark.

The evidence for benefit is limited and often of low quality, while the evidence for significant, multi-system, and potentially irreversible risk is substantial and well-established.

For the majority of patients with anxiety disorders, the risk profile of these medications appears to be fundamentally mismatched with the nature of the illness being treated.

Metabolic Syndrome: A Class-Wide Concern

Perhaps the most significant long-term risk associated with SGAs is the development of metabolic syndrome, a constellation of conditions that includes significant weight gain, dyslipidemia (abnormal cholesterol and triglycerides), insulin resistance leading to type 2 diabetes, and hypertension.⁶

These metabolic disturbances are not merely cosmetic; they are major risk factors for cardiovascular disease, reduce life expectancy, and are a primary reason for non-adherence to treatment.⁴⁹

The risk is so pronounced that the National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA) tracks annual diabetes screening as a key quality-of-care metric for all individuals on antipsychotic medication.¹⁴

The risk is not uniform across the class of SGAs:

• High Risk: Olanzapine and clozapine consistently demonstrate the highest risk for weight gain and metabolic disruption. One pooled analysis found that olanzapine was associated with an 11.3-fold increased odds of adverse weight gain events compared to placebo.³⁹
• Moderate Risk: Quetiapine and risperidone are generally considered to carry a moderate risk.⁴⁹ However, even the lower doses of quetiapine used for anxiety (e.g., ~100 mg/day) have been associated with clinically significant increases in body weight, BMI, blood pressure, and blood glucose in studies lasting 6 to 12 months.¹¹
• Lower Risk: Aripiprazole, lurasidone, and ziprasidone appear to be more metabolically benign, though they are not without risk.³⁶

Neurological and Motor Side Effects: The Specter of Irreversibility

The neurological risks associated with dopamine blockade are a defining feature of antipsychotic medications and represent a particularly concerning trade-off when treating a non-psychotic condition.

• Tardive Dyskinesia (TD): This is a potentially irreversible syndrome of involuntary, repetitive body movements, most commonly affecting the face, tongue, and lips.¹⁹ While the prevalence is higher with FGAs (estimated at 30%), the risk with SGAs remains substantial at approximately 21% with long-term use.⁶ TD can emerge even after relatively brief treatment periods and may persist indefinitely even after the offending medication is discontinued.¹⁹ The introduction of a risk for a permanent, disfiguring movement disorder to treat anxiety is a clinical decision that requires the utmost caution.
• Extrapyramidal Symptoms (EPS): These include a range of acute, Parkinson-like motor symptoms such as muscle rigidity, bradykinesia (slowness of movement), and tremor.⁶
• Akathisia: This is a particularly distressing side effect characterized by a subjective feeling of intense inner restlessness and a compelling urge to move.⁴⁸ It can be easily mistaken for a worsening of anxiety, potentially leading to an inappropriate increase in the antipsychotic dose. Aripiprazole is particularly noted for its risk of akathisia.³⁶

Other Clinically Significant Risks

Beyond the metabolic and neurological domains, antipsychotics carry a host of other adverse effects that can significantly impact a patient’s quality of life.

• Sedation and Cognitive Impairment: Due to potent histamine H1 blockade, sedation, somnolence, and cognitive fog are extremely common, particularly with olanzapine and quetiapine.³⁶ This can impair the ability to drive, work, or engage in daily activities and is a frequent reason for patient dissatisfaction, with many reporting feeling like a “zombie”.³²
• Cardiovascular Effects: Orthostatic hypotension (a drop in blood pressure upon standing, causing dizziness) is a common risk due to alpha-1 adrenergic blockade.⁶ Some agents, notably ziprasidone, can cause prolongation of the QTc interval on an electrocardiogram, which increases the risk for potentially fatal cardiac arrhythmias.⁶
• Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome (NMS): While rare, NMS is a medical emergency with a significant mortality rate. It is characterized by hyperthermia, severe muscle rigidity, autonomic instability, and altered mental status.⁶
• Hyperprolactinemia: Potent D2 blockade in the tuberoinfundibular pathway can lead to elevated levels of the hormone prolactin. This is most common with risperidone and paliperidone and can result in sexual dysfunction, gynecomastia (breast enlargement in males), galactorrhea (milk production), and amenorrhea (loss of menstrual periods).³⁴

The severity and breadth of this side effect profile create a fundamental mismatch between the intervention and the illness.

Anxiety disorders, while chronic and disabling, are not typically associated with progressive neurodegeneration or the profound functional decline seen in schizophrenia.

Standard, evidence-based treatments like SSRIs and CBT, while not without their own drawbacks, do not carry risks for permanent movement disorders or chronic, life-shortening metabolic diseases.

The decision to introduce an antipsychotic for anxiety is therefore not a simple step-up in treatment intensity; it is a qualitative leap to a different and higher stratum of medical risk.

This escalation is justifiable in the context of schizophrenia, where the high benefit of preventing psychosis can balance the high risk of the medication.

For anxiety, where the benefit is modest and uncertain, the risk-benefit calculus is far less favorable.

The following table provides a comparative summary of the most critical adverse effects for the SGAs commonly used in anxiety, facilitating a more nuanced risk assessment.

Drug	Weight Gain/Metabolic Risk	Sedation	Risk of EPS/TD	Risk of Akathisia	Risk of Hyperprolactinemia
Quetiapine	Moderate	High	Very Low	Low	Very Low
Olanzapine	Very High	High	Low	Low-Moderate	Low-Moderate
Risperidone	Moderate	Moderate	Moderate-High	Low-Moderate	High
Aripiprazole	Low	Low	Low	High	Very Low
Data synthesized from.6

Section 5: Clinical Guidance and Prescribing Realities

An examination of official clinical guidelines alongside real-world prescribing data reveals a significant and widening chasm between evidence-based recommendations and common clinical practice.

While major regulatory and professional bodies in the United States advocate for a highly cautious and restricted role for antipsychotics in anxiety, their use continues to be widespread, driven by a complex mix of clinical pressures and perceptions.

Official Guidelines and Regulatory Stances

The formal guidance from key health authorities is largely conservative.

• U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA): The FDA’s position is clear and restrictive. As previously noted, only one FGA, trifluoperazine, is approved for non-psychotic anxiety, and it is explicitly not recommended as an initial therapy.¹ No SGA has received FDA approval for any primary anxiety disorder indication.³ Furthermore, all antipsychotics carry an FDA-mandated black box warning regarding the increased risk of stroke and death when used to treat dementia-related psychosis in older adults, a warning that underscores the potential for serious harm in vulnerable populations.⁴
• National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH): The NIMH does not position antipsychotics as a standard treatment for anxiety. Its guidance for the public and clinicians consistently emphasizes SSRIs, SNRIs, buspirone, and the short-term use of benzodiazepines as the cornerstones of pharmacotherapy for anxiety disorders.⁴
• American Psychiatric Association (APA): Through its “Choosing Wisely” campaign, the APA has issued specific recommendations that discourage the routine use of antipsychotics for conditions where the evidence is weak and the risks are high, such as insomnia and the behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia.¹⁵ While not directly addressing anxiety, the principle is clear. Crucially, the APA strongly recommends that for
  any indication, the prescription of an antipsychotic must be preceded by an appropriate initial evaluation and accompanied by rigorous, structured, ongoing monitoring for metabolic and neurological side effects.¹⁵
• Canadian Guidelines (CANMAT): In contrast to the more restrictive US guidance, the Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) guidelines are somewhat more permissive. They position certain SGAs—including olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, and aripiprazole—as a potential third-line option or as an adjunctive therapy for specific disorders like GAD and panic disorder, to be used after first- and second-line treatments have failed.¹

The Psychiatrist’s Perspective and Prescribing Realities

Despite the cautious stance of major US authorities, prescribing data demonstrates that antipsychotics are a common tool in the clinical management of anxiety.⁷

A large survey of psychiatric inpatients in China, for instance, found that quetiapine and olanzapine were frequently prescribed for patients with a primary diagnosis of an anxiety disorder.⁵⁵

The rationale behind this practice is multifaceted:

• Treatment Refractoriness: The primary driver is the need for options in patients who have not responded to multiple other treatments.⁷
• Comorbidity: Many patients with anxiety disorders have comorbid conditions like major depressive disorder (MDD) or bipolar disorder. SGAs have approved indications as adjuncts in MDD and as primary treatments in bipolar disorder, so their use in an anxious patient with one of these comorbidities is often on-label for the comorbid condition.⁶
• Symptom-Targeted Treatment: Clinicians often use SGAs to target specific, highly distressing symptoms like severe insomnia, agitation, and obsessive rumination, for which their sedative and neuromodulatory properties are perceived as beneficial.¹⁰
• The Dosing Paradox: A common justification for using SGAs in anxiety is that the doses are much lower than those required for psychosis (e.g., 150 mg of quetiapine for GAD versus 600 mg for schizophrenia).⁵⁶ The implicit assumption is that lower doses equate to lower risk. However, as noted previously, evidence suggests that even these lower doses are associated with significant long-term metabolic risks.¹¹

This discrepancy between guidelines and practice can be understood as a form of “indication creep.” A drug’s established efficacy for a specific symptom in a severe illness (e.g., agitation in acute mania) is extrapolated to a phenomenologically similar symptom in a different, less severe illness (e.g., agitation and insomnia in GAD).

This creep is often driven by clinical experience and perceived utility rather than by robust evidence for the new indication.

The more permissive Canadian guidelines may be seen as an attempt to formalize and provide a framework for this existing clinical practice, rather than an endorsement based on a wealth of new, high-quality evidence.

Ethical and Medico-Legal Imperatives

The off-label use of medication is a legal and necessary part of medicine, particularly in psychiatry where the evidence base for complex presentations can be limited.⁵⁵

However, it confers a heightened level of responsibility on the prescribing clinician.

• Informed Consent: Given the lack of regulatory approval and the significant risk profile, a thorough informed consent process is a clinical and ethical necessity. The clinician must explicitly discuss the off-label nature of the prescription, the limitations of the evidence base, the potential benefits, and the full spectrum of short- and long-term risks.¹³ This discussion should be meticulously documented.
• Clinical Justification: The patient’s medical record must contain a clear and compelling rationale for the decision. This includes documentation of the failure of, or contraindication to, multiple first- and second-line evidence-based treatments, and a thoughtful articulation of why, for this specific patient, the potential benefits of an off-label antipsychotic are believed to outweigh the substantial and well-documented risks.⁶²

Section 6: Comparative Analysis of Therapeutic Modalities

To fully appreciate the role of antipsychotics in anxiety treatment, it is essential to place them in the context of other available therapeutic options.

Such a comparison reveals that antipsychotics occupy a unique niche as a high-risk, specialized intervention that should be reserved for specific, well-defined clinical circumstances after safer, more established treatments have failed.

Antipsychotics vs. SSRIs/SNRIs (First-Line Pharmacotherapy)

SSRIs and SNRIs are the undisputed first-line pharmacological treatments for most anxiety disorders.

• Mechanism: Antipsychotics employ a broad, multi-receptor blockade, whereas SSRIs/SNRIs utilize a targeted mechanism of inhibiting the reuptake of specific monoamines (serotonin and/or norepinephrine).⁶³
• Efficacy: The evidence base for SSRIs and SNRIs in anxiety is robust, extensive, and supports their use across the spectrum of anxiety disorders.⁴ In contrast, the efficacy of antipsychotics is limited to specific scenarios (e.g., quetiapine for GAD, augmentation for refractory OCD) and is supported by a much weaker and lower-quality body of evidence.¹²
• Side Effects: The risk profiles are profoundly different. The most common side effects of SSRIs/SNRIs include gastrointestinal distress, headache, and sexual dysfunction. While often bothersome, these are typically manageable, often transient, and do not carry the risk of permanent or life-shortening consequences.⁵ Antipsychotics, conversely, introduce the severe risks of irreversible tardive dyskinesia and chronic metabolic syndrome.¹⁹
• Clinical Role: SSRIs/SNRIs form the foundation of pharmacotherapy for anxiety. Antipsychotics should be considered, at best, a third-line strategy or an adjunctive option for carefully selected, highly refractory cases.⁹

Antipsychotics vs. Benzodiazepines

Benzodiazepines and antipsychotics are sometimes viewed as alternatives for managing severe anxiety, but they serve different purposes and have starkly contrasting risk profiles.

• Mechanism: Antipsychotics are primarily dopamine and serotonin antagonists, while benzodiazepines are positive allosteric modulators of the GABA-A receptor, enhancing the brain’s primary inhibitory system.⁶⁶
• Onset and Use: Benzodiazepines provide rapid, potent, and acute relief from anxiety, making them highly effective for short-term management of panic attacks or severe situational anxiety.⁴ Their use is typically on an as-needed (PRN) or short-term basis. Antipsychotics are used as daily maintenance medications, and their anxiolytic effects (distinct from sedation) may take weeks to develop.
• Risk Profile: This comparison represents a critical clinical trade-off. The primary long-term risk of benzodiazepines is the development of physiological tolerance, dependence, and a difficult, often protracted, withdrawal syndrome upon discontinuation.⁴ Antipsychotics do not carry this risk of dependence. However, the notion that this makes them “safer” for long-term use is a dangerous oversimplification. They substitute the risk of dependence with the risks of permanent neurological damage (TD) and chronic metabolic disease.⁶ The choice is not between a risky drug and a safe one, but between two different classes of high-risk medications with distinct long-term consequences.

Pharmacotherapy (Antipsychotics) vs. Psychotherapy (CBT)

CBT is a first-line treatment for all anxiety disorders, and its comparison with pharmacotherapy is crucial.

• Approach: Pharmacotherapy is a biological intervention targeting neurotransmitter systems, whereas CBT is a skills-based psychological intervention that targets the maladaptive cognitive patterns and behavioral responses that maintain anxiety.⁷⁰
• Efficacy and Durability: A large body of evidence demonstrates that CBT is at least as effective as first-line medications for anxiety disorders.⁷⁰ A key advantage of CBT is the durability of its effects; patients learn skills that they can continue to apply long after formal treatment has ended, leading to lower relapse rates compared to medication, which is typically effective only while it is being taken.⁷⁰
• Side Effects: CBT has no direct physical side effects, although the process of confronting feared situations and thoughts can be emotionally challenging and requires significant patient motivation and effort.⁷⁰ The side effect profile of antipsychotics, as detailed, is severe.
• Clinical Role: CBT is a first-line treatment, on par with SSRIs.⁷⁰ Antipsychotics should only be considered after an adequate trial of CBT has proven insufficient. In some cases of extreme agitation or distress, a short course of a sedating antipsychotic might be used to stabilize a patient to a point where they can meaningfully engage in psychotherapy, but this should be a bridge to therapy, not a replacement for it.¹⁰

The following table provides a comparative summary of these modalities, clarifying the unique position of antipsychotics within the treatment landscape for anxiety.

Treatment Modality	Primary Mechanism	Onset of Action	Efficacy Evidence	Key Side Effects/Risks	Clinical Role
SSRIs/SNRIs	Serotonin/Norepinephrine Reuptake Inhibition	2-6 weeks	Robust, Extensive	GI Upset, Headache, Sexual Dysfunction	First-Line Pharmacotherapy
Benzodiazepines	GABA-A Positive Allosteric Modulation	Minutes to Hours	Robust (Short-Term)	Sedation, Cognitive Impairment, Dependence, Withdrawal	Short-Term, Acute, or PRN Use
Antipsychotics (SGAs)	Multi-Receptor (D2, 5-HT2A, H1, etc.) Blockade	Variable (Sedation is rapid; anxiolysis is slower)	Limited, Low-Quality (except Quetiapine for GAD)	Metabolic Syndrome, Tardive Dyskinesia, EPS, Sedation	Third-Line or Augmentation for Refractory Cases
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT)	Cognitive Restructuring & Behavioral Exposure	Weeks to Months	Robust, Extensive, Durable	None (Requires patient effort)	First-Line Treatment
Data synthesized from.4

Section 7: The Patient Experience – A Synthesis of Lived Realities

Clinical trial data, with its focus on mean changes in rating scale scores and aggregated side effect frequencies, provides an essential but incomplete picture of a medication’s impact.

To understand the true clinical utility and burden of using antipsychotics for anxiety, it is crucial to synthesize this quantitative data with the qualitative, lived experiences of patients.

An analysis of patient-generated reviews and forum discussions reveals a starkly polarized reality, where these medications are often perceived as either “life-saving” or “life-ruining.”

The Duality of Patient-Reported Outcomes

Unlike the modest, averaged effects often reported in clinical trials, patient narratives tend to cluster at the extremes.

This suggests that for this class of medication, the individual experience is rarely “average.”

Common Themes of Benefit

For a subset of patients, particularly those who have suffered from severe, debilitating, and treatment-refractory anxiety, SGAs are described in transformative terms.

• Relief from Intractable Symptoms: Patients report that after failing multiple other medications, an antipsychotic was the only thing that could quiet relentless racing thoughts, halt terrifying panic attacks, or provide restorative sleep after months of insomnia.⁵¹ One user described quetiapine as the medication that “bridged the gap” after SSRIs and SNRIs had failed, allowing them to function again.⁷³ Another, after being hospitalized in a state of extreme distress, credited the drug with providing essential rest and preventing a complete breakdown.⁷³
• Restoration of Function: This symptom relief is often translated into tangible functional gains. Patients describe being able to return to demanding careers, re-engage with their families, and feel “human again”.⁵¹ For these individuals, the significant side effects are often viewed as a worthwhile trade-off for the restoration of their mental stability and quality of life.

Common Themes of Harm

Juxtaposed with these positive accounts are numerous reports of severe and debilitating adverse effects that were perceived as worse than the original anxiety itself.

• The “Zombie” Effect: A pervasive and powerful theme is the feeling of being emotionally blunted, cognitively slowed, and profoundly sedated. Patients use phrases like “felt like a robot,” “zombie-like state,” and describe a complete loss of motivation, personality, and the ability to experience joy (anhedonia).⁵¹ This experience can be so profound that it leads to a loss of self and social withdrawal.
• Metabolic Consequences: The clinical data on weight gain is vividly illustrated in patient narratives. Reports of gaining nearly 100 lbs in a few months are not uncommon.⁵² This rapid and significant weight gain is described as physically and psychologically distressing, leading to secondary health problems, poor body image, and a loss of self-worth.⁵¹
• Disturbing Neurological and Psychological Effects: Beyond sedation, patients report other distressing effects, including “horrific nightmares,” severe memory impairment, and the development of akathisia, which is described as an unbearable internal restlessness.⁵¹
• Difficult Withdrawal: Many patients who wish to stop the medication due to intolerable side effects report experiencing severe withdrawal syndromes, including debilitating rebound anxiety, insomnia, and nausea. This can make discontinuation extremely difficult, trapping patients on a medication that is causing them harm.³²

Bridging Patient Narratives and Clinical Data

These patient narratives are not merely anecdotal; they are the real-world expression of the drug’s pharmacology.

The “zombie” effect directly reflects the potent antihistaminic and anticholinergic properties of agents like olanzapine and quetiapine.

The dramatic stories of weight gain are the lived reality of the metabolic syndrome documented in clinical trials.⁴⁹

The unbearable restlessness is the patient’s description of akathisia.⁴⁸

These stories powerfully underscore that adverse effects are not just statistical probabilities on a package insert but are profound experiences that can be as, or more, debilitating than the condition being treated.

This highlights a critical limitation of relying solely on aggregated clinical trial data—the tyranny of the average.

An RCT might report a “modest but statistically significant improvement” in mean anxiety scores and an “average weight gain of 4kg.” This sounds like a potentially reasonable clinical trade-off.

However, the bimodal distribution of patient experiences suggests that the reality is not a modest benefit for most, but rather a profound benefit for a few and a profoundly negative and harmful experience for many others.

The decision to prescribe an antipsychotic for anxiety is therefore not a bet on an average, moderate outcome; it is a gamble on a potentially extreme one, with no reliable way to predict into which group a given patient will fall.

This reality must be at the forefront of the informed consent process.

Section 8: Conclusion – Synthesis, Clinical Recommendations, and Future Directions

Synthesis of the Evidence

The practice of prescribing antipsychotic medications for anxiety disorders exemplifies a significant and concerning gap between widespread clinical use and the supporting scientific evidence.

While born from a genuine need to help patients with treatment-refractory conditions, this trend has evolved on a foundation of largely low-quality studies, with the qualified exception of quetiapine for Generalized Anxiety Disorder.

The neurobiological rationale for their use is plausible, stemming from their broad, multi-receptor antagonism that can produce sedation and modulate serotonin and dopamine pathways.

However, this same non-specific mechanism is responsible for a severe and burdensome side effect profile that includes the risk of permanent neurological disorders and chronic metabolic disease.

This creates a fundamental mismatch between the high-risk nature of the intervention and the typical prognosis of non-psychotic anxiety disorders, for which multiple safer and more robustly effective treatments exist.

While a small subset of severely ill patients may derive substantial benefit, for the majority, the risk-benefit calculus does not favor the use of these agents.

A Proposed Clinical Algorithm for Judicious Use

Given the current state of evidence, antipsychotics should not be considered a standard part of the treatment algorithm for anxiety disorders.

Their use should be a rare exception, reserved for the most severe, refractory cases, and undertaken only after a systematic and documented process.

The following algorithm is proposed to guide clinicians in making this high-stakes decision:

1. Verify and Document True Treatment Resistance: Before considering an antipsychotic, the clinician must confirm and document the failure of adequate trials of standard, evidence-based treatments. This should include, at a minimum:

• Failure of at least two first-line pharmacotherapies from different classes (e.g., an SSRI and an SNRI), prescribed at an adequate dose for an adequate duration.
• Failure of an adequate trial of a first-line, evidence-based psychotherapy, such as Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT).

2. Conduct a Comprehensive Baseline Risk Assessment: A thorough medical evaluation is mandatory prior to initiation. This must include:

• Metabolic Assessment: Baseline weight, Body Mass Index (BMI), waist circumference, blood pressure, fasting blood glucose or HbA1c, and a fasting lipid panel. Patients with pre-existing metabolic syndrome, obesity, or diabetes are extremely poor candidates.
• Neurologic Assessment: A baseline assessment for any pre-existing movement disorders using a validated scale such as the Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS).

3. Engage in Rigorous Shared Decision-Making: The informed consent process must be comprehensive and transparent. It should explicitly cover:

• The off-label status of the medication for the anxiety indication.
• The limited and low-quality nature of the efficacy evidence.
• The full spectrum of potential short- and long-term risks, with particular emphasis on metabolic syndrome and the potential for irreversible tardive dyskinesia.
• The polarized nature of patient-reported outcomes, explaining that while some find the medication highly effective, many others experience intolerable side effects.
• The requirement for ongoing, intensive monitoring.
• This entire discussion must be clearly documented in the patient’s record.

4. Select Agent and Dose with Caution: If, after the above steps, the decision is made to proceed, the choice of agent and dose should be deliberate.

• For GAD, quetiapine has the most supporting evidence and may be considered first.
• The principle of “start low, go slow” is paramount. Use the lowest effective dose required to achieve the therapeutic goal.

5. Implement Mandatory and Structured Monitoring: Adherence to a strict monitoring protocol is not optional.

• Metabolic: Weight should be checked at every visit. BMI, blood pressure, fasting glucose, and lipids should be re-checked at 3 months after initiation and at least annually thereafter, consistent with APA recommendations.¹⁵
• Neurologic: An AIMS examination should be performed every 6 to 12 months to screen for the emergence of TD.

6. Define an Exit Strategy from the Outset: Antipsychotic use for anxiety should not become indefinite by default. At the time of initiation, the clinician and patient should establish clear criteria for what constitutes a successful trial (e.g., specific symptom reduction targets) and a predefined duration (e.g., 6-12 months), after which a planned, gradual taper and discontinuation attempt will be made.

Future Research Imperatives

The significant gaps in the current evidence base highlight a critical need for methodologically rigorous research to guide future clinical practice.

• High-Quality, Independently-Funded Trials: There is an urgent need for large-scale, long-term, randomized controlled trials that are not funded by the pharmaceutical industry. These trials must be designed to assess not only efficacy but also the long-term safety and functional outcomes of using SGAs for anxiety.
• Comparative Effectiveness Research: Future studies should not be limited to placebo comparisons. Head-to-head trials are needed to compare SGA augmentation against other evidence-based augmentation strategies for treatment-resistant anxiety, such as adding buspirone, pregabalin, or a different class of antidepressant.
• Predictive Biomarkers: Research should focus on identifying genetic, neurobiological, or clinical biomarkers that can predict which patients are most likely to respond favorably to an antipsychotic and, just as importantly, which patients are at the highest risk for developing severe metabolic or neurological side effects.
• Long-Term Neurological and Structural Effects: Further investigation is required to understand the long-term effects of these medications on brain structure and function in non-psychotic populations, clarifying concerns about potential brain volume changes.⁷⁷

In conclusion, while antipsychotics may hold a small, niche role for a limited population of patients with the most severe and refractory forms of anxiety, their routine or early use is not supported by the current balance of evidence.

A return to a more cautious and evidence-based approach, prioritizing safer and more established treatments and reserving antipsychotics as a true last resort, is essential for optimizing patient outcomes and adhering to the principle of primum non nocere—first, do no harm.

Works cited

1. Antipsychotics for anxiety: Types, uses, and more – Medical News Today, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/antipsychotics-for-anxiety
2. An umbrella review on the use of antipsychotics in anxiety disorders: A registered report protocol – OUCI, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://ouci.dntb.gov.ua/en/works/7nNgO3j7/
3. An umbrella review on the use of antipsychotics in anxiety disorders: A registered report protocol, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9202921/
4. Mental Health Medications – National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/mental-health-medications
5. Pharmacotherapy of Anxiety Disorders: Current and Emerging Treatment Options – Frontiers, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychiatry/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.595584/full
6. (PDF) An umbrella review on the use of antipsychotics in anxiety disorders: A registered report protocol – ResearchGate, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/361354162_An_umbrella_review_on_the_use_of_antipsychotics_in_anxiety_disorders_A_registered_report_protocol
7. Antipsychotics Increasingly Prescribed for Anxiety | Psychiatric News, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://psychnews.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/pn.46.17.psychnews_46_17_20_1
8. Antipsychotics Increasingly Prescribed for Anxiety | Psychiatric News – Psychiatry Online, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/pn.46.17.psychnews_46_17_20_1
9. An umbrella review on the use of antipsychotics in anxiety disorders: A registered report protocol | PLOS One, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0269772
10. Expanding the Possibilities of Antipsychotics: An Interview with Dr. Josephine McNary, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.bridgestorecovery.com/blog/expanding-the-possibilities-of-antipsychotics-an-interview-with-dr-josephine-mcnary/
11. Off-label prescribing of antipsychotics: Where’s the evidence? | MDLinx, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.mdlinx.com/article/off-label-prescribing-of-antipsychotics-wheres-the-evidence/2yfKDpddkLWtMLPLllNV9Z
12. ANTIPSYCHOTIC AGENTS IN ANXIETY DISORDERS: AN UMBRELLA REVIEW | International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology | Oxford Academic, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://academic.oup.com/ijnp/article/28/Supplement_1/i29/8009935
13. Should Psychiatrists Use Atypical Antipsychotics to Treat Nonpsychotic Anxiety? – PMC, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2720845/
14. Avoiding the Inappropriate Use of Antipsychotic Medication in Anxiety Disorders, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.bcbstx.com/provider/education/education/news/2024/02-09-2024-avoiding-inappropriate-use-antipsychotic-meds-anxiety-disorders
15. Choosing Wisely – Psychiatry.org, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/quality-improvement/choosing-wisely
16. Antipsychotic Medications – StatPearls – NCBI Bookshelf, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK519503/
17. 2-Minute Neuroscience: Antipsychotics – YouTube, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSJlCdOba7w
18. Dopamine Dynamics and Neurobiology of Non-Response to Antipsychotics, Relevance for Treatment Resistant Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal – PubMed Central, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10046109/
19. Medication-Induced Tardive Dyskinesia: A Review and Update – PMC – PubMed Central, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5472076/
20. Mechanism of Action of Atypical Antipsychotic Drugs in Mood Disorders – PubMed Central, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7765178/
21. The Role of Dopamine in Schizophrenia from a Neurobiological and Evolutionary Perspective: Old Fashioned, but Still in Vogue – Frontiers, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychiatry/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2014.00047/full
22. Extended-release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR): a once-daily monotherapy effective in generalized anxiety disorder. Data from a randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled study – Oxford Academic, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://academic.oup.com/ijnp/article/13/3/305/657923
23. Neurotransmitters and Their Influence on Mental Health Disorders – Open Access Journals, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.openaccessjournals.com/articles/neurotransmitters-and-their-influence-on-mental-health-disorders-18231.html
24. accessed on December 31, 1969, https.academic.oup.com/ijnp/article/28/Supplement_1/i29/8009935
25. Mechanism of Action of Quetiapine – Psychopharmacology Institute, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://psychopharmacologyinstitute.com/publication/mechanism-of-action-of-quetiapine-2109
26. What is the mechanism of Quetiapine Fumarate? – Patsnap Synapse, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://synapse.patsnap.com/article/what-is-the-mechanism-of-quetiapine-fumarate
27. What is the mechanism of Risperidone? – Patsnap Synapse, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://synapse.patsnap.com/article/what-is-the-mechanism-of-risperidone
28. Quetiapine: Uses, Interactions, Mechanism of Action | DrugBank Online, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://go.drugbank.com/drugs/DB01224
29. FF #315 Olanzapine for Nausea, Delirium, Anxiety, Insomnia and Cachexia | Palliative Care Network of Wisconsin, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.mypcnow.org/fast-fact/olanzapine-for-nausea-delirium-anxiety-insomnia-and-cachexia/
30. Olanzapine – StatPearls – NCBI Bookshelf, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK532903/
31. Olanzapine: Uses, Interactions, Mechanism of Action | DrugBank Online, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://go.drugbank.com/drugs/DB00334
32. Common questions about olanzapine – NHS, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.nhs.uk/medicines/olanzapine/common-questions-about-olanzapine/
33. Olanzapine (Zyprexa): Uses & Side Effects, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/drugs/18192-olanzapine-tablets
34. Mechanism of Action – PERSERIS® (risperidone) HCP, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.perserishcp.com/mechanism-of-action
35. Mechanism of Action of Risperidone – Psychopharmacology Institute, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://psychopharmacologyinstitute.com/publication/mechanism-of-action-of-risperidone-2126
36. Atypical antipsychotic – Wikipedia, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atypical_antipsychotic
37. Antipsychotic agents in anxiety disorders: An umbrella review | Request PDF, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/378369018_Antipsychotic_agents_in_anxiety_disorders_An_umbrella_review
38. Antipsychotic agents in anxiety disorders: An umbrella review – PubMed, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38382649/
39. Using Antipsychotics Off Label Often Brings Little Benefit | Psychiatric News, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/pn.46.20.psychnews_46_20_15_1
40. Summary of the Comparative Effectiveness Review on Off-Label Use of Atypical Antipsychotics | Journal of Managed Care Pharmacy, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.jmcp.org/doi/abs/10.18553/jmcp.2012.18.s5-b.1
41. Atypical antipsychotics in primary generalized anxiety disorder or comorbid with mood disorders – PMC, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3432909/
42. Quetiapine Completed Phase 3 Trials for Generalized Anxiety Disorder Treatment, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://go.drugbank.com/drugs/DB01224/clinical_trials?conditions=DBCOND0027966&phase=3&purpose=treatment&status=completed
43. Safety & Efficacy Study of Quetiapine Fumarate (SEROQUEL®) vs. Placebo & Active Control in Generalized Anxiety Disorder | ClinicalTrials.gov, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT00329446
44. Olanzapine Augmentation of Fluoxetine for Refractory Generalized Anxiety Disorder: A Placebo Controlled Study | Request PDF – ResearchGate, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/7621123_Olanzapine_Augmentation_of_Fluoxetine_for_Refractory_Generalized_Anxiety_Disorder_A_Placebo_Controlled_Study
45. An open-label trial of risperidone augmentation for refractory anxiety disorders – PubMed, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16649823/
46. Augmentation Strategies for Treatment-Resistant Anxiety Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis | Focus – Psychiatry Online, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.focus.15205
47. Efficacy of typical and atypical antipsychotics for primary and comorbid anxiety symptoms or disorders: a review – PubMed, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17017818/
48. Side effects of antipsychotics – Mind, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.mind.org.uk/information-support/drugs-and-treatments/antipsychotics/side-effects/
49. Atypical Antipsychotics and Metabolic Syndrome: From Molecular Mechanisms to Clinical Differences – MDPI, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8247/14/3/238
50. Avoid the Inappropriate Use of Antipsychotic Medication in Anxiety Disorders, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.bcbstx.com/provider/education/education/news/2025/1-15-2025-avoid-the-inappropriate-use-of-antipsychotic-medication-in-anxiety-disorders
51. Quetiapine (Seroquel) Reviews and User Ratings: Effectiveness, Ease of Use, and Satisfaction – WebMD, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://reviews.webmd.com/drugs/drugreview-4718-seroquel-oral
52. Olanzapine (Zyprexa) Reviews and User Ratings: Effectiveness, Ease of Use, and Satisfaction – WebMD, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://reviews.webmd.com/drugs/drugreview-1644-olanzapine-oral
53. Medication for psychosis – Healthtalk, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://healthtalk.org/experiences/experiences-psychosis/medication-psychosis-2/
54. Mental Health Medications – Mental Health Association in NYS, Inc. – Mental Health Association in New York State, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://mhanys.org/a-z-topic-guide/mental-health-medications/
55. Off-label use of antipsychotic medications in psychiatric inpatients in China: a national real-world survey, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8314470/
56. What is the dose of Quetiapine (Atypical Antipsychotic) for anxiety disorder? – Dr.Oracle, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.droracle.ai/articles/48124/dose-of-quetiapine-for-anxiety
57. Quetiapine Dosage Guide + Max Dose, Adjustments – Drugs.com, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.drugs.com/dosage/quetiapine.html
58. How and when to take quetiapine – NHS, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.nhs.uk/medicines/quetiapine/how-and-when-to-take-quetiapine/
59. Off-label prescribing in psychiatric practice – Cambridge University Press, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/advances-in-psychiatric-treatment/article/offlabel-prescribing-in-psychiatric-practice/FCCFD68CC4973AB5C9E29F03CAC3A5C1
60. Prescribing “Off-Label”: What Should a Physician Disclose? – AMA Journal of Ethics, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/prescribing-label-what-should-physician-disclose/2016-06
61. Off-label medicine use: Ethics, practice and future directions – RACGP, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www1.racgp.org.au/ajgp/2021/may/off-label-medicine-use
62. The Law and Practice of Off-Label Prescribing and Physician Promotion, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://jaapl.org/content/49/1/53
63. Antipsychotic vs Antidepressant | Power, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.withpower.com/guides/antipsychotic-vs-antidepressant-9f07
64. Antidepressants vs. Antipsychotics – What’s the Difference? – Canadian Pharmacy King, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.canadianpharmacyking.com/KingsBlog/Antidepressants-vs-Antipsychotics-Whats-the-Difference/
65. Anxiety medication: List, types, and side effects, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/323666
66. What is the difference between benzodiazepines and antipsychotics …, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.droracle.ai/articles/171814/benzodiazepines-vs-antipsychotics
67. BENZODIAZEPINES IN COMBINATION WITH ANTIPSYCHOTIC DRUGS FOR SCHIZOPHRENIA: GABA-ERGIC TARGETED THERAPY – Psychiatria Danubina, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.psychiatria-danubina.com/UserDocsImages/pdf/dnb_vol29_noSuppl%203/dnb_vol29_noSuppl%203_345.pdf
68. What are benzodiazepines? – Mind, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.mind.org.uk/information-support/drugs-and-treatments/sleeping-pills-and-minor-tranquillisers/about-benzodiazepines/
69. Psychiatry: An Overview of Prescription Medication – NYC Psychiatric Associates, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.nycpsychiatricassociates.com/post/psychiatry-an-overview-of-prescription-medication
70. Best Treatment for Anxiety: Cognitive Behavioral Therapy … – GoodRx, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.goodrx.com/conditions/generalized-anxiety-disorder/cbt-vs-medication
71. Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy or Medication: Which is the Best Option?, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.supervisionandcounseling.org/post/cognitive-behavioral-therapy-or-medication-which-is-the-best-option
72. How Do I Choose Between Medication and Therapy? – American Psychological Association, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.apa.org/ptsd-guideline/patients-and-families/medication-or-therapy
73. Quetiapine User Reviews & Ratings – Drugs.com, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.drugs.com/comments/quetiapine/
74. Does Olanzapine cause Anxiety? Read What Users Report – Drugs.com, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://www.drugs.com/comments/olanzapine/sfx-anxiety.html
75. Risperdal Oral Reviews and User Ratings: Effectiveness, Ease of Use, and Satisfaction, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://reviews.webmd.com/drugs/drugreview-9846-risperdal-oral
76. Risperidone (Risperdal, Risperdal Consta) Reviews and User Ratings: Effectiveness, Ease of Use, and Satisfaction – WebMD, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://reviews.webmd.com/drugs/drugreview-6283-risperidone-oral
77. Long-Term Antipsychotic Use and the Benefit-to-Harm Balance: More on the Risk of Relapse – Psychiatry Online, accessed on August 1, 2025, https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.ajp.20250031?af=R
78. Over the Long Term, Antipsychotic Medicine Stabilized Functional Connectivity in Depressed Patients with Psychosis – Brain & Behavior Research Foundation (BBRF), accessed on August 1, 2025, https://bbrfoundation.org/content/over-long-term-antipsychotic-medicine-stabilized-functional-connectivity-depressed-patients