Development of an implementation guide to facilitate the roll-out of early intervention services for psychosis

Vocational functioning in young people accessing services for first-episode psychosis and ultra-high risk of psychosis: A longitudinal naturalistic cohort study

AIMS

Young people with first-episode psychosis (FEP) or at ultra-high risk (UHR) of psychosis often have lower vocational engagement than their peers. This study examines the effect of treatment in early intervention for psychosis services in Australia on engagement in education and employment.

METHODS

This is a naturalistic sample of young people aged 12-25 with FEP (n = 1574) and UHR (n = 1515), accessing treatment in the headspace Early Psychosis (hEP) programme. Engagement in education and employment was assessed at baseline and every 90 days in treatment. Mixed effects logistic regression were used to analyse changes over time.

RESULTS

On entering the hEP programme, approximately 49% of the young people with FEP and 28% of the young people at UHR status identified as Not in Education, Employment or Training (NEET). The odds of being NEET were reduced by 27% (95% confidence interval = [14, 39]) for every 6 months treatment for the FEP group, but no change in NEET status was observed in the UHR group. In both groups, absence from daily activities was significantly reduced during time in treatment.

CONCLUSION

While there are methodological challenges analysing real-world non-control group cohort data, the findings indicate positive effects of the hEP programme on vocational and daily activity engagement for young people with FEP and at UHR status. A large proportion of the young people still identified as NEET after receiving treatment services, suggesting further refinement to ensure targeted and consistent vocational support throughout care.

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.

A comparison of the National Clinical Audit of Psychosis 2019/2020 standards and First Episode Psychosis Services Fidelity Scale 1.0

AIM

The authors compare two approaches to assessment of the quality of early psychosis intervention services, the National Clinical Audit of Psychosis used in the United Kingdom and the First Episode Psychosis Services Fidelity Scale used in North America and Europe.

METHODS

We compare the two approaches on the source of standards, measurement type, data collection, time requirements, scoring and reliability. Finally, we review their strengths and limitations.

RESULTS

Both measures are based on standards derived from the same research evidence base. Both methods rely on data from health records and administrative data. The audit is supplemented with user survey data, the fidelity scale with clinician interviews. The audit requires more time. The audit is based on quality indicators rated as present or absent which yields a statistical benchmark. The Fidelity Scale is based on quality indicators that are rated on a five-point scale yielding a standards-based measure. The two methods cover similar service components, but the FEPS-FS has a broader coverage of team functioning. The National audit also collects data on the user experience directly from patients. The fidelity scale has achieved good to excellent inter-rater reliability, the reliability of the audit has not been tested.

CONCLUSIONS

Both methods have face validity and provide reliable and useful measures of quality of care. The NCAP works in the context of a single provider health system, the FEPS-FS works in a more variable health system. Comparing the two systems in the field would support international comparison of standards of care.

The History of Coordinated Specialty Care for Early Intervention in Psychosis in the United States: A Review of Effectiveness, Implementation, and Fidelity

Coordinated Specialty Care (CSC) is a multidisciplinary team approach to providing care for young and emerging adults having their first episode of psychosis. CSC programs have expanded rapidly throughout the United States going from 12 programs in 2008 to over 160 programs a decade later. The purpose of this historical review is to document the process and conditions that led to the accelerated dissemination of these programs across the country. CSC models began in the US in the early 2000s, but nationwide expansion followed the 2008 Recovery After an Initial Schizophrenia Episode trial. As programs have grown, debates have risen about fidelity to CSC models. The challenges facing CSC programs today include lack of evidence on what are the core components of CSC and how fidelity monitoring relates to positive client outcomes.

Early Intervention in Psychosis services: A systematic review and narrative synthesis of the barriers and facilitators to implementation

BACKGROUND

Early intervention in psychosis (EIP) services target the early manifestation of psychosis and provide multidisciplinary care. They demonstrate effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Implementation of EIP services is inconsistent and piecemeal. This systematic review and narrative synthesis aims to identify barriers and facilitators to EIP service implementation.

METHODS

We conducted an electronic search of databases (EMBASE, Medline, Web of Science, and PsychINFO) to detect papers reporting EIP service implementation findings and associated barriers and facilitators. The search occurred between June to August 2020, and again in January 2021. Articles meeting inclusion criteria were extracted and narratively synthesized. A quality assessment was conducted using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies were selected. The most common study design was descriptive accounts of implementation. Patient age ranged varied from 14 to 35 years. We identified three barrier and facilitator domains: (a) system; (b) services; and (c) staff, and a range of subdomains. The most frequent subdomains were "funding" and "strength of collaboration and communication between EIP and outside groups and services". Associations between domains and subdomains were evident, particularly between systems and services.

CONCLUSIONS

A range of barriers and facilitators to EIP implementation exist. Some of these are generic factors germane across health systems and services, while others are specific to EIP services. A thorough prior understanding of these challenges and enablers are necessary before implementation is attempted. Accounting for these issues within local and national contexts may help predict and increase the likelihood of services' success, stability, and longevity.

Development of a casual video game (Match Emoji) with psychological well-being concepts for young adolescents

Digital interventions for mental health and well-being have been shown to be effective in trials, yet uptake and retention in real-world settings are often disappointing. A more significant impact may be achieved by building interventions that are closer to how target groups use technology to support their own psychological well-being. Casual video games may be poised to offer an opportunity in this area as they are a highly popular activity among young people. We propose that mental health content can be integrated into the explicit content and the implicit processes used in casual video games. In this paper, we describe the design and core processes of Match Emoji, a casual video game designed to support the development of psychological well-being via gameplay and micro-messages. The iterative development of Match Emoji involved various phases, including a systematic review of the literature, consultation with target users, clinicians, game developers, and close reading of the literature. Expert collaboration was sought throughout the process to ensure gameplay and messages matched behaviour change and learning theories. An acceptability and feasibility study of Match Emoji will inform a randomised controlled trial in the future.

Which components of specialized early intervention for psychosis do senior providers see as most important?

AIM

Specialized early interventions improve outcomes in early psychosis (EP). Experts have proposed a number of essential treatment components. However, it is unclear whether these reflect the views of senior clinic staff charged with implementing this model in practice.

METHOD

Twenty-Five senior EP clinic staff across California completed a survey indicating which features of EP treatment they considered most important.

RESULTS

Components related to the service structure and the need for a prompt, comprehensive assessment and care planning were considered most important, despite the limited evidence base evaluating these aspects of care. Administration of clozapine to treatment-refractory patients and weight gain interventions were considered the least important, despite the relatively strong evidence base supporting these treatment components.

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest a bi-directional dissemination gap, where components considered most important by senior providers receive limited research attention, while some areas with supporting evidence may be underappreciated in clinical practice.