Early detection of psychosis: helpful or stigmatizing experience? A qualitative study

The lived experience of mental disorders in adolescents: a bottom-up review co-designed, co-conducted and co-written by experts by experience and academics

We provide here the first bottom-up review of the lived experience of mental disorders in adolescents co-designed, co-conducted and co-written by experts by experience and academics. We screened first-person accounts within and outside the medical field, and discussed them in collaborative workshops involving numerous experts by experience - representing different genders, ethnic and cultural backgrounds, and continents - and their family members and carers. Subsequently, the material was enriched by phenomenologically informed perspectives and shared with all collaborators. The inner subjective experience of adolescents is described for mood disorders, psychotic disorders, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, autism spectrum disorders, anxiety disorders, eating disorders, externalizing disorders, and self-harm behaviors. The recollection of individuals' past histories also indexes the prodromal (often transdiagnostic) features predating the psychiatric diagnosis. The experience of adolescents with mental disorders in the wider society is described with respect to their family, their school and peers, and the social and cultural context. Furthermore, their lived experience of mental health care is described with respect to receiving a diagnosis of mental disorder, accessing mental health support, receiving psychopharmacological treatment, receiving psychotherapy, experiencing peer support and mental health activism, and achieving recovery. These findings can impact clinical practice, research, and the whole society. We hope that this co-designed, co-conducted and co-written journey can help us maintain our commitment to protecting adolescents' fragile mental health, and can help them develop into a healthy, fulfilling and contributing adult life.

[Ethical Considerations of Including Minors in Clinical Trials Using the Example of the Indicated Prevention of Psychotic Disorders]

Ethical Considerations of Including Minors in Clinical Trials Using the Example of the Indicated Prevention of Psychotic Disorders Abstract: As a vulnerable group, minors require special protection in studies. For this reason, researchers are often reluctant to initiate studies, and ethics committees are reluctant to authorize such studies. This often excludes minors from participating in clinical studies. This exclusion can lead to researchers and clinicians receiving only incomplete data or having to rely on adult-based findings in the treatment of minors. Using the example of the study "Computer-Assisted Risk Evaluation in the Early Detection of Psychotic Disorders" (CARE), which was conducted as an 'other clinical investigation' according to the Medical Device Regulation, we present a line of argumentation for the inclusion of minors which weighs the ethical principles of nonmaleficence (especially regarding possible stigmatization), beneficence, autonomy, and fairness. We show the necessity of including minors based on the development-specific differences in diagnostics and early intervention. Further, we present specific protective measures. This argumentation can also be transferred to other disorders with the onset in childhood and adolescence and thus help to avoid excluding minors from appropriate evidence-based care because of insufficient studies.

Factors impacting intent to seek treatment within youth at clinical high risk for psychosis

Existing work indicates that there is unmet need for care in those at clinical high risk (CHR) for psychosis. However, research on the factors that drive treatment seeking behaviors in this population is limited. Further, it is unknown how help-seeking behavior in CHR individuals compares to those seen in mood disorders, who have a higher rate of treatment seeking behavior. Participants (n = 559) completed an assessment of their intent to seek mental health treatment, attenuated psychosis-risk symptoms, and psychiatric symptoms and diagnoses. Participants were divided into CHR (n = 91), Mood Disorders (MD) (n = 72), or Community Controls (CC) groups (n = 396), whose intent to seek treatment was compared. Associations between intent to seek treatment with past treatment, depression, anxiety, positive and negative symptoms, distress from symptoms, intelligence quotient (IQ) estimates, and insight were assessed in CHR individuals. Further, it was assessed how this differs for the MD group. The MD group reported higher intent to seek treatment than CHR individuals, which reported higher intent to seek treatment than the CC group. In those at CHR, previous treatment, greater depression and anxiety severity, and higher distress all independently predicted higher intent to seek treatment. Depression predicted intent to seek treatment in both MD and CHR individuals. Previous treatment predicted intent to seek treatment in those at CHR. Our findings suggest that depression and past treatment utilization are critical factors in increasing intent to seek treatment in those at CHR, potentially serving as important targets for engaging this population in treatment.

Personal Recovery Among People at Risk for Developing Serious Mental Health Problems: A Qualitative Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Personal recovery refers to a person's pursuit of a full, meaningful life despite the potentially debilitating impact of a mental illness. An evidence base describing personal recovery among people at risk for developing a mental illness is lacking, limiting the potential for mental health services to support personal recovery. To address this gap, the authors synthesized the extant research describing personal recovery among people at risk for developing a mental illness.

METHODS

A systematic search of several literature databases (MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycInfo, Web of Science Core Collection, and Cochrane Library) was conducted to retrieve qualitative and case studies and first-person accounts. The Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines for systematic reviews were followed. Included studies reported on participants at variable risk for developing a schizophrenia spectrum, bipolar, major depressive, or borderline personality disorder. Articles were retrieved through a librarian-assisted search and through use of additional strategies (e.g., expert consultation). Abstracts were screened by the research team, and themes were developed by using thematic synthesis.

RESULTS

The 36 included articles were synthesized, and six themes were generated: difficulties and challenges; establishing an understanding of, and finding ways to cope with, one's mental health challenges; reestablishing a sense of agency and personhood; receiving support from people and services, as well as restoring relationships; reestablishing hope, meaning, and purpose; and overcoming stigma and destigmatizing mental illness in others.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings provide a conceptual foundation that can guide future research on personal recovery and clinical interventions that foster it among people at risk for mental illness.

Psychoeducation for individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis: A scoping review

Psychoeducation is recommended in the treatment of patients with schizophrenia and has been shown to improve satisfaction with mental health service and treatment adherence, reduce relapse and hospital readmission rates, and enhance functioning and quality of life. Youth at clinical high risk for psychosis (CHR) may also benefit from receiving psychoeducation as part of their treatment. The goal of this study was to conduct a scoping review to map out the existing literature on psychoeducation for CHR individuals, including content, utilization, and benefits, in order to identify areas for future research and clinical care. Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic search of electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection) to identify literature through 02/25/2022 that provided data or significant commentary about the provision of psychoeducation to CHR individuals. After screening titles and abstracts, four co-authors assessed full-text articles for eligibility. Thirty-three studies were included in the review. Psychoeducation is recommended in the treatment of CHR individuals, is a preferred treatment option among CHR individuals, and many CHR programs report offering psychoeducation. However, details about the psychoeducational content and method of delivery are notably absent from recommendations and reports on the provision of CHR psychoeducation in real-world settings. We identified two brief and structured CHR psychoeducation interventions and one longer-term psychoeducational multifamily group model for CHR that show feasibility and promise, though they have not yet undergone randomized trials to evaluate effectiveness of the psychoeducation. We also identified several comprehensive CHR interventions that included an explicit psychoeducation module, though the unique role of the psychoeducational component is unknown. Despite being recommended as a critical component of treatment for CHR individuals and preferred by CHR individuals, the ways in which psychoeducation are being delivered to CHR individuals in real-world practice is still largely ambiguous. Rigorous evaluations of psychoeducation treatment models are needed, as well as investment from clinical programs to facilitate the implementation and dissemination of standardized psychoeducation for CHR individuals.

Development of the Brief Educational Guide for Individuals in Need (BEGIN): A psychoeducation intervention for individuals at risk for psychosis

AIM

Identification of individuals with psychosis risk (PR) through screening and specialized assessment is becoming more widespread in an effort to promote early intervention and improve recovery outcomes. PR individuals report interest in psychoeducation, though such interventions are currently lacking. Our goal was to develop a structured PR psychoeducation intervention grounded in theory and stakeholder feedback.

METHODS

By following a step-by-step intervention development model, we identified relevant conceptual frameworks, developed the content and format, and obtained stakeholder feedback. This process resulted in a 5-session PR psychoeducation intervention, Brief Educational Guide for Individuals in Need (BEGIN), with content conveyed visually via a slideshow presentation. PR individuals (n = 5) and parents of PR individuals (n = 5) reviewed BEGIN's content and format, and provided feedback through semi-structured qualitative interviews. Major themes were identified through iterative thematic analysis.

RESULTS

PR individuals and parents had a positive impression of BEGIN's materials and step-by-step format and psychoeducation about the PR condition. They indicated that the intervention was likely to encourage agency. PR participants emphasized the importance of a patient's decision regarding whether their family member(s) should participate in BEGIN. Parents reported that BEGIN is an important first step in treatment and offers a safe therapeutic environment. Feedback was then utilized to modify the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

BEGIN is desired by consumers and may lay the foundation for future engagement with treatment by facilitating agency. A feasibility trial is underway and future studies are needed to measure outcomes (e.g., treatment engagement) and evaluate BEGIN as an evidence-based PR psychoeducation model.

My child's future mental health: Carer's engagement with risk identification in an intervention study for youth with at-risk mental states

AIM

Prevention and early intervention efforts of serious mental illnesses has yielded promising results. However, alongside benefits, several ethical concerns have been raised, including the effects of being identified as being at-risk. In these debates, the voice of parents or carers is conspicuously absent. This is especially concerning as several at-risk interventions are trialled in under-age youth where parents consent on behalf of young people. Therefore, this study aimed to understand carer's experiences of their teenager being identified as at risk for psychosis.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with seven carers who had provided consent for their teenager to participate in a stepped intervention study for youth at-risk for psychosis. Questions explored their experiences regarding having their teenager being identified as at-risk. Transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

We identified five main themes from seven female carers' experiences of risk identification including: (a) recall of risk information was limited, or variable, (b) goal of risk disclosure was perceived to be positive, (c) negative emotions were associated with knowledge of risk, (d) relief from uncertainty and helplessness and (e) effects of risk disclosure were mediated by individual circumstance.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the results demonstrate that carers' experience of risk disclosure varied with factors surrounding their individual circumstances, and the process of disclosure. Whilst participants acknowledged potential adverse effects associated with risk disclosure, many still adopted a positive outlook. Tailoring safe and effective disclosure of risk to suit the needs of youth and carers could outweigh the potential risks.

Emotional and stigma-related experiences relative to being told one is at risk for psychosis

OBJECTIVE

Despite the appeal of early intervention in psychosis, there is concern that identifying youth as having high psychosis risk (PR) may trigger stigma. This study employed a pre-post design to measure change in PR participants' emotions about PR upon being told of their PR status and according to whether this was the first time receiving this information.

METHODS

Participants (n = 54) identified as at PR via structured interview rated their emotions about PR before and after being told they were at PR. Qualitative analyses explored the valence of participant reflections on being given this information.

RESULTS

Participants reported significantly less negative emotion after being told of their PR status (p < .001), regardless of whether they were hearing this for the first time (p = .72). There was no change in positive emotions or the predominant belief that they should keep their PR status private. Most participants commented positively about the process of feedback but negatively about its impact on their self-perceptions and/or expectations of others' perceptions of them.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to collect pre-post data related to being told one is at PR and to examine quantitative and qualitative responses across and within individuals. For a majority of participants, clinical feedback stimulated negative stereotypes even as it relieved some distress. To actively address internalized stigma, clinicians providing feedback to PR youth must attend to the positive and negative impacts on how youth think about themselves as well as how they feel.

Patients', carers' and clinicians' attitudes towards alternative terms to describe the at-risk for psychosis state

OBJECTIVE

Language used in psychiatry is important because it provides an understandable and accurate way of describing clinical and theoretical concepts. The use of labels in psychiatry has often been associated with stigma and reduced engagement with clinical services. This studys aims were to generate new terms for the 'at-risk mental state' (ARMS) concept and to investigate what young people, their caregivers and clinicians thought about them as well as terms commonly used in early intervention clinics. Another aim was to understand participants preference related to the best timing to introduce the at-risk concept and the extent and context of the information presented.

METHODS

New terms illustrating the at-risk concept have been generated by a youth reference group with lived experience of mental illness: 'pre-diagnosis stage' (PDS), potential of developing a mental illness (PDMI) and disposition for developing a mental illness (DDMI). A specifically designed questionnaire was administered to 46 patients with ARMS, 24 caregivers and 52 clinicians to obtain their feedback on newly proposed terms and on the terms already used in clinical practice and research.

RESULTS

The preferred terms were PDS, PDMI and ARMS. The least favoured terms were Ultra High Risk and Attenuated Psychosis Syndrome, which were thought to be associated with the most stigma. Most participants agreed that disclosure about diagnosis should be delivered early by the key clinician.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients generated terms such as PDS, PDMI, alongside ARMS should be considered to be used in clinical practice. They present with low stigma and are illustrative of young peoples difficulties.

A qualitative systematic review of Early Intervention in Psychosis service user perspectives regarding valued aspects of treatment with a focus on cognitive behavioural therapy

Background:

Despite the increasing evidence base and focus given to Early Intervention in Psychosis (EIP) services, qualitative literature remains sparse, particularly in relation to the ‘At Risk Mental State’ (ARMS) group. Although research has looked to service user experience within EIP, data have not been collated to understand valued aspects of treatment across both EIP groups: first episode psychosis (FEP) and ARMS, particularly regarding cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT).

Aims:

To conduct a systematic review of qualitative literature to examine service user perspectives on support provided in EIP treatment with a focus on CBT.

Method:

This was a thematic synthesis of qualitative studies. Nine studies were included in the analysis identified through a systematic database search and citation tracking. Studies were critically appraised using the critical appraisal skills programme tool.

Results:

Nine studies were identified for inclusion. Six analytical themes and 20 descriptive categories were identified.

Conclusions:

User perspectives confirm previous findings highlighting importance of therapeutic relationships for treatment success. Normalisation, learning and understanding were valued across both groups, which increased coping, and can be facilitated throughout the EIP journey. Harnessing the support of those involved in users’ care and understanding these relationships further enhances interventions utilised. Understanding the stage the individual is at regarding their experiences is essential in relation to targeting support. Transdiagnostic aspects of CBT were valued across both groups. ARMS referred to more specific strategies and there were some differences regarding coping styles and flexibility preferences; however, this may be due to group differences in problem trajectory and care provision.

Predictors of internalized mental health stigma in a help-seeking sample of youth: The roles of psychosis-spectrum symptoms and family functioning

Experiencing psychosis-spectrum symptoms is challenging to youth. Among many difficulties, internalized mental health stigma-the internalization of negative stereotypes-can lead to shame and withdrawal. The objective of this study was to better understand the correlates of internalized stigma among a clinical sample of youth with psychosis-spectrum symptoms. Participants (n = 66; 12-25 years old) were referred by community providers in Maryland, United States. Psychosis-spectrum symptoms were measured via the Structured Interview for Psychosis-Risk Syndromes (SIPS); family-functioning was measured via the Family Assessment Device. Interviewers rated participants' social/role functioning via the Global Functioning: Social and Role Scales. Internalized stigma was measured using the Internalized Stigma of Mental Illness (ISMI) total scale and subscales. The sample included 34 individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis, 16 experiencing early psychosis, and 16 help-seeking controls. Regression analyses indicated that unusual beliefs, avolition, role functioning, and lower family-functioning (caregiver-reported) were significantly associated with higher aspects of internalized stigma, controlling for other symptoms and sociodemographics. These models explained 27% of the variance (adjusted R2) in the total ISMI scale and between 15% to 49% of the variance in ISMI-subscales. Among this help-seeking sample, unusual beliefs, avolition, higher role functioning, and lower family-functioning (caregiver-reported) were associated with more internalized stigma. Pending future research with larger samples, therapeutic interventions focused on these factors and their correlates may benefit youth. Future research is needed to determine temporal precedence of these associations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Counterpoint. Early intervention for psychosis risk syndromes: Minimizing risk and maximizing benefit

BACKGROUND

Malhi et al. in this issue critique the clinical high risk (CHR) syndrome for psychosis.

METHOD

Response to points of critique.

RESULTS

We agree that inconsistency in CHR nomenclature should be minimized. We respectfully disagree on other points. In our view: a) individuals with CHR and their families need help, using existing interventions, even though we do not yet fully understand disease mechanisms; b) substantial progress has been made in identification of biomarkers; c) symptoms used to identify CHR are specific to psychotic illnesses; d) CHR diagnosis is not "extremely difficult"; e) the pattern of progression, although heterogenous, is discernible; f) "psychosis-like symptoms" are common but are not used to identify CHR; and g) on the point described as 'the real risk,' CHR diagnosis does not frequently cause harmful stigma.

DISCUSSION

Malhi et al.'s arguments do not fairly characterize progress in the CHR field nor efforts to minimize stigma. That said, much work remains in areas of consistent nomenclature, mechanisms of disease, dissecting heterogeneity, and biomarkers. With regard to what the authors term the "real risk" of stigma associated with a CHR "label," however, our view is that avoiding words like "risk" and "psychosis" reinforces the stigma that both they and we mean to oppose. Moreover, patients and their families benefit from being given a term that describes what is happening to them.

Should we be concerned about stigma and discrimination in people at risk for psychosis? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have provided initial evidence that people at risk for psychosis (PR) suffer from stigma and discrimination related to their condition. However, no study has systematically reviewed stigma and discrimination associated with being at PR and the potential underlying mechanisms.

METHODS

This work aimed to systematically review all studies addressing stigma and discrimination in PR people in order to assess: (1) the occurrence of this phenomenon and its different components (public, internalized, perceived, and labeling-related), (2) whether stigma affects outcomes of the PR state, and (3) whether other factors modulate stigma among PR individuals.

RESULTS

The reviewed studies (n = 38) widely differ in their design, methodological quality, and populations under investigation, thus limiting direct comparison of findings. However, converging evidence suggests that the general public endorses stigmatizing attitudes towards PR individuals, and that this is more frequent in people with a low educational level or with no direct experience of the PR state. PR individuals experience more internalized stigma and perceive more discrimination than healthy subjects or patients with non-psychotic disorders. Further, PR labeling is equally associated with both positive (e.g. validation and relief) and negative effects (e.g. status loss and discrimination). Moreover, stigma increases the likelihood of poor outcome, transition to full-psychosis, disengagement from services, and family stigma among PR individuals. Finally, very limited evidence awaiting replication supports the efficacy of cognitive therapies in mitigating the negative effects of stigma.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence confirms previous concerns about stigma and its negative consequences for PR individuals, thus having important public health implications.

Anxiety in youth at clinical high risk for psychosis: A case study and conceptual model

Some individuals identified as being at clinical high risk (CHR) for developing psychosis may suffer substantial anxiety due to a fear of transitioning to psychosis. This can be associated with catastrophic misinterpretation of normal mental experiences, such as a momentary lapse in attention, as markers for psychosis, fueled by hypervigilance for mental experiences that may be perceived as signs of impending psychosis. This anxiety may only worsen due to the self-stigma triggered by admission to a psychiatric CHR clinic, independent of whether or not the individual transitions to psychosis. Based on a clinical case study, we propose a cognitive model for this anxiety, an extension of Clark's model of panic. Our model accounts for causal factors of this distress, such as self-stigma and maladaptive core beliefs. It also includes maintaining factors such as hypervigilance for mental experiences and catastrophic misinterpretation of normal mental experiences as anomalous and portending eventual psychosis. We outline assessment and treatment guidelines and offer suggestions for how this model could be empirically validated. We suggest that treatment with this model, under the neural diathesis-stress framework, may have the potential to lower the risk of transition to psychosis and that assessment for such anxiety should be part of standard CHR care.

Impact of "psychosis risk" identification: Examining predictors of how youth view themselves

BACKGROUND

Identifying young people as at clinical high-risk (CHR) for psychosis affords opportunities for intervention to possibly prevent psychosis onset. Yet such CHR identification could plausibly increase stigma. We do not know whether these youth already perceive themselves to be at psychosis-risk (PR) or how their being told they are at PR might impact how they think about themselves.

METHODS

148 CHR youth were asked about labels they had been given by others (labeling by others) or with which they personally identified (self-labeling). They were then asked which had the greatest impact on how they thought about themselves. We evaluated whether being told vs. thinking they were at PR had stronger effects.

FINDINGS

The majority identified nonpsychotic disorders rather than PR labels as having the greatest impact on sense of self (67.6% vs. 27.7%). However, participants who identified themselves as at PR had an 8.8 (95% CI = 2.0-39.1) increase in the odds of the PR label having the greatest impact (p < 0.01). Additionally, having been told by others that they were at PR was associated with a 4.0 increase in odds (95% CI = 1.1-15.0) that the PR label had the most impact (p < 0.05).

INTERPRETATION

Nonpsychotic disorder labels appear to have a greater impact on CHR youth than psychosis-risk labels. However, thinking they are at PR, and, secondarily, being told they are at PR, appears to increase the relative impact of the PR label. Understanding self- and other-labeling may be important to how young people think of themselves, and may inform early intervention strategies.

Utility of risk-status for predicting psychosis and related outcomes: evaluation of a 10-year cohort of presenters to a specialised early psychosis community mental health service

Psychosis transition rates by those at clinical high risk have been highly variable and few studies have compared service presenters across the full psychosis risk spectrum with respect to medium-term outcomes. A 10-year service cohort was examined (N=1997), comprising all presentations to an early psychosis service for young people experiencing a recent psychotic episode or at increased risk ('Psychological Assistance Service', Newcastle, Australia). Baseline and longitudinal service data (median follow-up =7.3 years) were used in a series of logistic regressions to examine relationships between psychosis risk-status and subsequent illness episodes, hospital admissions, and community contacts. Six baseline groups were identified: existing (14.5%) and recent psychosis (19.8%); ultra-high risk (UHR, 9.6%); non-psychotic disorders without (35.4%, the reference group) and with psychiatric admissions (8.3%); and incomplete assessments (12.5%). High comorbidity levels were reported by the cohort (psychosocial problems, 61.1%; depression, 54.1%; substance misuse, 40.7%). UHR clients experienced similar psychosis transition rates to the reference group (17.3% vs. 14.6%; 8.9% vs. 9.1% within 2-years) and comparable rates of subsequent non-psychosis outcomes. A 25.9% conversion rate from early psychosis to schizophrenia was detected. However, among transitioning individuals, UHR clients faired relatively better, particularly with respect to changes in comorbidity and mental health contacts. Interventions tailored to current problems, recovery and psychological strengthening may be more appropriate than those based on estimated psychosis risk, which currently lacks clinical utility.