Integrated treatment to achieve functional recovery for first-episode psychosis

Early intervention in psychosis programs in Africa, Asia and Latin America; challenges and recommendations

Background

While early intervention in psychosis (EIP) programs have been increasingly implemented across the globe, many initiatives from Africa, Asia and Latin America are not widely known. The aims of the current review are (a) to describe population-based and small-scale, single-site EIP programs in Africa, Asia and Latin America, (b) to examine the variability between programs located in low-and-middle income (LMIC) and high-income countries in similar regions and (c) to outline some of the challenges and provide recommendations to overcome existing obstacles.

Methods

EIP programs in Africa, Asia and Latin America were identified through experts from the different target regions. We performed a systematic search in Medline, Embase, APA PsycInfo, Web of Science and Scopus up to February 6, 2024.

Results

Most EIP programs in these continents are small-scale, single-site programs that serve a limited section of the population. Population-based programs with widespread coverage and programs integrated into primary health care are rare. In Africa, EIP programs are virtually absent. Mainland China is one of the only LMICs that has begun to take steps toward developing a population-based EIP program. High-income Asian countries (e.g. Hong Kong and Singapore) have well-developed, comprehensive programs for individuals with early psychosis, while others with similar economies (e.g. South Korea and Japan) do not. In Latin America, Chile is the only country in the process of providing population-based EIP care.

Conclusions

Financial resources and integration in mental health care, as well as the availability of epidemiological data on psychosis, impact the implementation of EIP programs. Given the major treatment gap of early psychosis in Africa, Latin America and large parts of Asia, publicly funded, locally-led and accessible community-based EIP care provision is urgently needed.

Studying the context of psychoses to improve outcomes in Ethiopia (SCOPE): Protocol paper

BACKGROUND

Global evidence on psychosis is dominated by studies conducted in Western, high-income countries. The objectives of the Study of Context Of Psychoses to improve outcomes in Ethiopia (SCOPE) are (1) to generate rigorous evidence of psychosis experience, epidemiology and impacts in Ethiopia that will illuminate aetiological understanding and (2) inform development and testing of interventions for earlier identification and improved first contact care that are scalable, inclusive of difficult-to-reach populations and optimise recovery.

METHODS

The setting is sub-cities of Addis Ababa and rural districts in south-central Ethiopia covering 1.1 million people and including rural, urban and homeless populations. SCOPE comprises (1) formative work to understand care pathways and community resources (resource mapping); examine family context and communication (ethnography); develop valid measures of family communication and personal recovery; and establish platforms for community engagement and involvement of people with lived experience; (2a) a population-based incidence study, (2b) a case-control study and (2c) a cohort study with 12 months follow-up involving 440 people with psychosis (390 rural/Addis Ababa; 50 who are homeless), 390 relatives and 390 controls. We will test hypotheses about incidence rates in rural vs. urban populations and men vs. women; potential aetiological role of khat (a commonly chewed plant with amphetamine-like properties) and traumatic exposures in psychosis; determine profiles of needs at first contact and predictors of outcome; (3) participatory workshops to develop programme theory and inform co-development of interventions, and (4) evaluation of the impact of early identification strategies on engagement with care (interrupted time series study). Findings will inform development of (5) a protocol for (5a) a feasibility cluster randomised controlled trial of interventions for people with recent-onset psychosis in rural settings and (5b) two uncontrolled pilot studies to test acceptability, feasibility of co-developed interventions in urban and homeless populations.

Cost-effectiveness of early intervention in psychosis in low- and middle-income countries: economic evaluation from São Paulo, Brazil

AIMS

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of early intervention for psychosis (EIP) services are well established in high-income countries but not in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Despite the scarcity of local evidence, several EIP services have been implemented in LMICs. Local evaluations are warranted before adopting speciality models of care in LMICs. We aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of implementing EIP services in Brazil.

METHODS

A model-based economic evaluation of EIP services was conducted from the Brazilian healthcare system perspective. A Markov model was developed using a cohort study conducted in São Paulo. Cost data were retrieved from local sources. The outcome of interest was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) measured as the incremental costs over the incremental quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the results.

RESULTS

The study included 357 participants (38% female), with a mean (SD) age of 26 (7.38) years. According to the model, implementing EIP services in Brazil would result in a mean incremental cost of 4,478 Brazilian reals (R$) and a mean incremental benefit of 0.29 QALYs. The resulting ICER of R$ 15,495 (US dollar [USD] 7,640 adjusted for purchase power parity [PPP]) per QALY can be considered cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of 1 Gross domestic product (GDP) per capita (R$ 18,254; USD 9,000 PPP adjusted). The model results were robust to sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports the economic advantages of implementing EIP services in Brazil. Although cultural adaptations are required, these data suggest EIP services might be cost-effective even in less-resourced countries.

Psychoeducation, motivational interviewing, cognitive remediation training, and/or social skills training in combination for psychosocial functioning of patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

Psychoeducation, motivational interviewing, cognitive remediation training, and social skills training have been found to be effective interventions for patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. However, their efficacy on psychosocial functioning when provided in combination remains unclear, compared with all types of control conditions. It would also be meaningful to explore the differences of efficacy in patients with first-episode psychosis (FEP) and those with longer term of illness.

METHODOLOGY

The present review followed the guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Full-text English journal articles of randomized controlled trials published in the past decade in the databases of PubMed, CINAHL Complete, Embase, and PsycINFO were searched. Included studies were all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with participants diagnosed with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. The included studies should test combined interventions with at least two components from: psychoeducation, motivational interviewing, cognitive remediation training, and social skills training and incorporate assessment of psychosocial functioning at least at baseline and post-intervention.

RESULTS

Seven studies were included for systematic review, and six of them were eligible for meta-analysis. Five out of the seven studies reported effects on psychosocial functioning that favored combined interventions over any type of control condition. A significant pooled effect was derived from the six studies, SMD = 1.03, 95% CI [0.06, 2.00], Z = 2.09, p = 0.04, I 2 = 96%. However, the pool effect became insignificant when synthesizing five of the studies with non-FEP patients as participants and four of the studies testing relative effects of combined interventions compared with stand-alone interventions/interventions with one less component. None of the included studies adopted motivational interviewing and only one of the studies worked with FEP patients.

CONCLUSION

Psychoeducation, cognitive remediation training, and social skills training in combination can effectively enhance psychosocial functioning of patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. It is warranted to conduct more RCTs to test the effects of different specific combinations of the above interventions on psychosocial functioning, especially in FEP patients.

Specialized inpatient treatment for young people with early psychosis: acute-treatment and 12-month results

The objective of the study was to investigate the development of clinical outcomes of young people with early psychosis in a specialized inpatient treatment and assess the feasibility of such an intervention in an inpatient setting. The study was a prospective cohort study of patients with early psychosis treated at the specialized inpatient treatment "Fühinterventions-und Therapiezentrum, FRITZ" (early intervention and therapy center) in Berlin, Germany. The primary outcomes were attitudes towards psychiatric medication and patient satisfaction with treatment after 6 weeks. Secondary outcomes were clinical symptoms, functioning, remission, recovery, all-cause treatment discontinuation, and rehospitalisation at 6 and 12 months after inpatient treatment. We recruited 95 inpatients with early psychosis. Attitudes towards psychiatric medication (Δ_6weeks = 3.00, d_6weeks = 0.55; Δ_6mo = 2.15, d_6mo = 0.35; Δ_12mo = 3.03, d_12mo = 0.52) and patient satisfaction (Δ_6weeks = 0.21, d_6weeks = 0.40; Δ_6mo = 0.32, d_6mo = 0.43; Δ_12mo = 0.13, d_12mo = 0.17) changed with medium effect sizes at six weeks up to a 6- and 12-month follow-up. Clinical outcomes changed significantly with medium-to-large-effect sizes over 12 months CGI_Δ12mo = 1.64, d_12mo = -1.12; PANSS total_Δ12mo = 20.10, d_12mo = -0.76; GAF_Δ12mo = 19.58, d_12mo = 1.25). The all-cause treatment discontinuation rate was 13.69% (n = 13) at a 6-month and 35.79% (n = 34) at a 12-month follow-up. The rehospitalization rate was 30.53% (n = 29) at a 6-month and 43.16% (n = 41) at a 12-month follow-up. Patients with specialized inpatient treatment for early psychosis showed improvements in attitude towards psychiatric medication, patient satisfaction, symptoms, and functioning for up to 12 months.Trial registration: DRKS00024351, 2021/02/11 retrospectively registered.

Implementation of early psychosis services in Latin America: A scoping review

AIM

The evidence of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of early intervention for psychosis (EIP) services has motivated their implementation worldwide. However, complex interventions of such EIP services require local adaptations to successfully match population needs and cultural differences. Latin America is a heterogenous region where EIP services are progressively being adopted. Our aim is to map such initiatives in the region with a focus on implementation outcomes.

METHODS

A scoping review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines was conducted. International and regional databases were searched for publications describing EIP programmes in the region. Besides mapping the services, we described implementation outcomes based on the Standards for Reporting Implementation Studies Checklist.

RESULTS

Ten articles describing seven EIP initiatives from the region were found. Four countries were represented: Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Mexico. The implementation outcomes reporting was heterogenous, although it was possible to ascertain EIP services are feasible and adequate for the region's context. Also, there is some evidence of effectiveness in terms of reducing hospitalizations and improving symptoms. Information about fidelity measures was scarce and there was no information about costs or cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Only a small proportion of Latin American countries have adopted EIP services. Although these programmes seem to be feasible and effective, data on other implementation outcomes, such as fidelity, cultural appropriateness, cost-effectiveness and affordability are not available. This might in part explain why this effective approach has not been yet scaled-up at nationwide levels.

Achieving better outcomes for schizophrenia patients in Hong Kong: Strategies for improving treatment adherence

Recent research on second-generation long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAI SGAs) has proven its effectiveness in minimizing medication nonadherence problem and reducing relapses. Administered by medical professionals, making quick detection of nonadherence possible, long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) facilitate immediate intervention and recovery process, and thus are favored by psychiatrists. Despite a higher initial cost with LAIs, the subsequent schizophrenia-related health costs for hospitalizations and outpatients are greatly reduced. With reference to guidelines published by psychiatric associations around the globe, this article looks at scenarios in Hong Kong on the management of severe mentally ill patients with regard to the use of a host of psychosocial interventions as well as LAI SGAs as a preferable treatment. In particular, it examines the benefits of using LAI SGAs for Hong Kong patients who demonstrated high nonadherence treatment rates due to their social environment. It assesses the rationale behind the early usages of LAI SGAs, which help to provide better recovery outcomes for patients.

Specialised early intervention teams (extended time) for recent-onset psychosis

BACKGROUND

Psychosis is an illness characterised by the presence of hallucinations and delusions that can cause distress or a marked change in an individual's behaviour (e.g. social withdrawal, flat or blunted effect). A first episode of psychosis (FEP) is the first time someone experiences these symptoms that can occur at any age, but the condition is most common in late adolescence and early adulthood. This review is concerned with FEP and the early stages of a psychosis, referred to throughout this review as 'recent-onset psychosis.' Specialised early intervention (SEI) teams are community mental health teams that specifically treat people who are experiencing, or have experienced, a recent-onset psychosis. SEI teams provide a range of treatments including medication, psychotherapy, psychoeducation, educational and employment support, augmented by assertive contact with the service user and small caseloads. Treatment is time limited, usually offered for two to three years, after which service users are either discharged to primary care or transferred to a standard adult community mental health team. Evidence suggests that once SEI treatment ends, improvements may not be sustained, bringing uncertainty about the optimal duration of SEI to ensure the best long-term outcomes. Extending SEI has been proposed as a way of providing continued intensive treatment and continuity of care, of usually up to five years, in order to a) sustain the positive initial outcomes of SEI; and b) improve the long-term trajectory of the illness.

OBJECTIVES

To compare extended SEI teams with treatment as usual (TAU) for people with recent-onset psychosis. To compare extended SEI teams with standard SEI teams followed by TAU (standard SEI + TAU) for people with recent-onset psychosis.

SEARCH METHODS

On 3 October 2018 and 22 October 2019, we searched Cochrane Schizophrenia's study-based register of trials, including registries of clinical trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing extended SEI with TAU for people with recent-onset psychosis and all RCTs comparing extended SEI with standard SEI + TAU for people with recent-onset psychosis. We entered trials meeting these criteria and reporting usable data as included studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently inspected citations, selected studies, extracted data and appraised study quality. For binary outcomes we calculated the risk ratios (RRs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). For continuous outcomes we calculated the mean difference (MD) and their 95% CIs, or if assessment measures differed for the same construct, we calculated the standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% CIs. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and created a 'Summary of findings' table using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three RCTs, with a total 780 participants, aged 16 to 35 years. All participants met the criteria for schizophrenia spectrum disorders or affective psychoses. No trials compared extended SEI with TAU. All three trials randomly allocated people approximately two years into standard SEI to either extended SEI or standard SEI + TAU. The certainty of evidence for outcomes varied from low to very low. Our primary outcomes were recovery and disengagement from mental health services. No trials reported on recovery, and we used remission as a proxy. Three trials reported on remission, with the point estimate suggesting a 13% increase in remission in favour of extended SEI, but this included wide confidence intervals (CIs) and a very uncertain estimate of no benefit (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.31; 3 trials, 780 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Two trials provided data on disengagement from services with evidence that extended SEI care may result in fewer disengagements from mental health treatment (15%) in comparison to standard SEI + TAU (34%) (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.75; 2 trials, 380 participants; low-certainty evidence). There may be no evidence of a difference in rates of psychiatric hospital admission (RR 1.55, 95% CI 0.68 to 3.52; 1 trial, 160 participants; low-certainty evidence), or the number of days spent in a psychiatric hospital (MD -2.70, 95% CI -8.30 to 2.90; 1 trial, 400 participants; low-certainty evidence). One trial found uncertain evidence regarding lower global psychotic symptoms in extended SEI in comparison to standard SEI + TAU (MD -1.90, 95% CI -3.28 to -0.52; 1 trial, 156 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It was uncertain whether the use of extended SEI over standard SEI + TAU resulted in fewer deaths due to all-cause mortality, as so few deaths were recorded in trials (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.64; 3 trials, 780 participants; low-certainty evidence). Very uncertain evidence suggests that using extended SEI instead of standard SEI + TAU may not improve global functioning (SMD 0.23, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.76; 2 trials, 560 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was low risk of bias in all three trials for random sequence generation, allocation concealment and other biases. All three trials had high risk of bias for blinding of participants and personnel due to the nature of the intervention. For the risk of bias for blinding of outcome assessments and incomplete outcome data there was at least one trial with high or unclear risk of bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There may be preliminary evidence of benefit from extending SEI team care for treating people experiencing psychosis, with fewer people disengaging from mental health services. Evidence regarding other outcomes was uncertain. The certainty of evidence for the measured outcomes was low or very low. Further, suitably powered studies that use a consistent approach to outcome selection are needed, but with only one further ongoing trial, there is unlikely to be any definitive conclusion for the effectiveness of extended SEI for at least the next few years.

Specialised early intervention teams for recent-onset psychosis

BACKGROUND

Psychosis is an illness characterised by the presence of hallucinations and delusions that can cause distress or a marked change in an individual's behaviour (e.g. social withdrawal, flat or blunted effect). A first episode of psychosis (FEP) is the first time someone experiences these symptoms that can occur at any age, but the condition is most common in late adolescence and early adulthood. This review is concerned with first episode psychosis (FEP) and the early stages of a psychosis, referred to throughout this review as 'recent-onset psychosis.' Specialised early intervention (SEI) teams are community mental health teams that specifically treat people who are experiencing, or have experienced a recent-onset psychosis. The purpose of SEI teams is to intensively treat people with psychosis early in the course of the illness with the goal of increasing the likelihood of recovery and reducing the need for longer-term mental health treatment. SEI teams provide a range of treatments including medication, psychotherapy, psychoeducation, and occupational, educational and employment support, augmented by assertive contact with the service user and small caseloads. Treatment is time limited, usually offered for two to three years, after which service users are either discharged to primary care or transferred to a standard adult community mental health team. A previous Cochrane Review of SEI found preliminary evidence that SEI may be superior to standard community mental health care (described as 'treatment as usual (TAU)' in this review) but these recommendations were based on data from only one trial. This review updates the evidence for the use of SEI services.

OBJECTIVES

To compare specialised early intervention (SEI) teams to treatment as usual (TAU) for people with recent-onset psychosis.

SEARCH METHODS

On 3 October 2018 and 22 October 2019, we searched Cochrane Schizophrenia's study-based register of trials, including registries of clinical trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SEI with TAU for people with recent-onset psychosis. We entered trials meeting these criteria and reporting useable data as included studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently inspected citations, selected studies, extracted data and appraised study quality. For binary outcomes we calculated the risk ratios (RRs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). For continuous outcomes we calculated the mean difference (MD) and their 95% CIs, or if assessment measures differed for the same construct, we calculated the standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% CIs. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and created a 'Summary of findings' table using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three RCTs and one cluster-RCT with a total of 1145 participants. The mean age in the trials was between 23.1 years (RAISE) and 26.6 years (OPUS). The included participants were 405 females (35.4%) and 740 males (64.6%). All trials took place in community mental healthcare settings. Two trials reported on recovery from psychosis at the end of treatment, with evidence that SEI team care may result in more participants in recovery than TAU at the end of treatment (73% versus 52%; RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.97; 2 studies, 194 participants; low-certainty evidence). Three trials provided data on disengagement from services at the end of treatment, with fewer participants probably being disengaged from mental health services in SEI (8%) in comparison to TAU (15%) (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.79; 3 studies, 630 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was low-certainty evidence that SEI may result in fewer admissions to psychiatric hospital than TAU at the end of treatment (52% versus 57%; RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.00; 4 studies, 1145 participants) and low-certainty evidence that SEI may result in fewer psychiatric hospital days (MD -27.00 days, 95% CI -53.68 to -0.32; 1 study, 547 participants). Two trials reported on general psychotic symptoms at the end of treatment, with no evidence of a difference between SEI and TAU, although this evidence is very uncertain (SMD -0.41, 95% CI -4.58 to 3.75; 2 studies, 304 participants; very low-certainty evidence). A different pattern was observed in assessment of general functioning with an end of trial difference that may favour SEI (SMD 0.37, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.66; 2 studies, 467 participants; low-certainty evidence). It was uncertain whether the use of SEI resulted in fewer deaths due to all-cause mortality at end of treatment (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.20; 3 studies, 741 participants; low-certainty evidence). There was low risk of bias for random sequence generation and allocation concealment in three of the four included trials; the remaining trial had unclear risk of bias. Due to the nature of the intervention, we considered all trials at high risk of bias for blinding of participants and personnel. Two trials had low risk of bias and two trials had high risk of bias for blinding of outcomes assessments. Three trials had low risk of bias for incomplete outcome data, while one trial had high risk of bias. Two trials had low risk of bias, one trial had high risk of bias, and one had unclear risk of bias for selective reporting.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that SEI may provide benefits to service users during treatment compared to TAU. These benefits probably include fewer disengagements from mental health services (moderate-certainty evidence), and may include small reductions in psychiatric hospitalisation (low-certainty evidence), and a small increase in global functioning (low-certainty evidence) and increased service satisfaction (moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence regarding the effect of SEI over TAU after treatment has ended is uncertain. Further evidence investigating the longer-term outcomes of SEI is needed. Furthermore, all the eligible trials included in this review were conducted in high-income countries, and it is unclear whether these findings would translate to low- and middle-income countries, where both the intervention and the comparison conditions may be different.

The relationship between functional recovery and quality of life in patients affected by schizophrenia and treated at a community mental health center in Turkey

PURPOSE

The study was conducted to determine the levels of functional recovery and quality of life (QOL) among a group of patients suffering from schizophrenia treated at a Community Mental Health Center (CMHC) and to evaluate the relationship between these two treatment outcomes.

DESIGN AND METHODS

This observational study was implemented among 132 patients affected by schizophrenia treated at a CMHC in Turkey.

FINDINGS

A statistically significant positive correlation was found between the general and subscale mean scores of the functional remission of general schizophrenia scale and the mean score of all domains of the World Health Organization QOL (r = 0.63-0.33; P < .001).

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

QOL increases as the functional recovery levels increase. Nursing practices should be planned to improve functional recovery levels of patients.

Predictors of Hospitalization of Individuals With First-Episode Psychosis: Data From a 2-Year Follow-Up of the RAISE-ETP

OBJECTIVE

Despite treatment advances in other domains, inpatient psychiatric hospitalization rates for individuals with first-episode psychosis remain high. Even with early intervention services, a third or more of individuals are hospitalized over the first 2 years of treatment. Reducing hospitalization is desirable from the individual's perspective and for public health reasons because hospitalization costs are a major component of treatment costs.

METHODS

Univariate and multivariate baseline and time-varying covariate analyses were conducted to identify predictors of hospitalization in the Recovery After an Initial Schizophrenia Episode-Early Treatment Program (RAISE-ETP) study, a 2-year cluster randomized trial for participants experiencing a first episode of psychosis who were outpatients at study entry. The trial compared an early intervention treatment model (NAVIGATE) with usual community care at 34 clinics across the United States.

RESULTS

RAISE-ETP enrolled 404 participants of whom 382 had one or more postbaseline assessments that included hospitalization data. Thirty-four percent of NAVIGATE and 37% of usual-care participants were hospitalized during the trial. Risk analyses revealed significant predictors of hospitalization to be the number of hospitalizations before study entry; duration of untreated psychosis; and time-varying days of substance misuse, presence of positive symptoms, and beliefs about the value of medication.

CONCLUSIONS

These results indicate that hospital use may be decreased by reducing the duration of untreated psychosis and prior hospitalizations, minimizing residual symptoms, preventing substance misuse, and facilitating adherence to medication taking. Addressing these factors could enhance the impact of first-episode early intervention treatment models and also enhance outcomes of people with first-episode psychosis treated using other models.

Factors affecting mental health nurses working with clients with first-episode psychosis: A qualitative study

WHAT IS KNOWN ABOUT THE SUBJECT?: First-episode psychosis (FEP) usually occurs in adolescence, a time of great change and upheaval and the effect on the sufferer and their family can be immense The nurse's role is to alleviate this suffering, aid recovery and minimize the risk of relapse. They manage this onerous task ideally through the therapeutic relationship, and use the skills of assessment and risk identification in order to maximize patient outcomes. WHAT DOES THE STUDY ADD TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: The study adds knowledge about the challenges that mental health nurses experience specifically in the presentation of first-episode psychosis The findings of this study reinforce the idea that pathways to care need to be clearly identified with a community-wide educational led experience This study illuminates the fact that additional training and formalized clinical supervision are necessary for mental health nurses to improve quality of care and reduce stress levels, both of which lead to better clinical outcomes. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: Mental Health nurses should engage with additional training, formalized clinical supervision and avail of peer support in order to improve confidence, skills and quality of care. Dialogue among mental healthcare colleagues is important not only about caring for people presenting with a first-episode psychosis but in relation to the wider community and family. This demonstrates the need for family-centred care within the mental health profession. There should be more recognition of the social impact on the individual during untreated psychosis with regard to isolation and withdrawal as well as factors which also affect help-seeking behaviours.

ABSTRACT

Introduction Although there is much research on mental health nurses working with individuals presenting with psychosis, there is a lack of knowledge about the factors that impact the experience of nurses in the presentation specifically of first-time psychosis. Aim This study aimed to explore the factors that impact on the experience of mental health nurses working with individuals and their families who present with a first-time psychosis. Method This qualitative study was conducted through individual semi-structured interviews with eight mental health nurses recruited from community mental health settings with a minimum of 2 years post-qualification experience. Data were then subjected to a thematic content analysis. Results This study identified the importance of therapeutic engagement, as well as the need to have clear pathways to care and building capacity through clinical supervision and training when working with this population. Implications for practice Mental Health nurses should engage with additional training, formalized clinical supervision and avail of peer support in order to improve confidence, skills and quality of care, leading to better therapeutic engagement. Pathways to care should be embedded within the wider community to ensure ease of access for individuals and their families. There should be more recognition of the social impact on the individual during untreated psychosis with regard to isolation and withdrawal as well as factors which also affect help-seeking behaviours.

Comparison of Early Intervention Services vs Treatment as Usual for Early-Phase Psychosis: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Meta-regression

IMPORTANCE

The value of early intervention in psychosis and allocation of public resources has long been debated because outcomes in people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders have remained suboptimal.

OBJECTIVE

To compare early intervention services (EIS) with treatment as usual (TAU) for early-phase psychosis.

DATA SOURCES

Systematic literature search of PubMed, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov without language restrictions through June 6, 2017.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized trials comparing EIS vs TAU in first-episode psychosis or early-phase schizophrenia spectrum disorders.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

This systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Three independent investigators extracted data for a random-effects meta-analysis and prespecified subgroup and meta-regression analyses.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The coprimary outcomes were all-cause treatment discontinuation and at least 1 psychiatric hospitalization during the treatment period.

RESULTS

Across 10 randomized clinical trials (mean [SD] trial duration, 16.2 [7.4] months; range, 9-24 months) among 2176 patients (mean [SD] age, 27.5 [4.6] years; 1355 [62.3%] male), EIS was associated with better outcomes than TAU at the end of treatment for all 13 meta-analyzable outcomes. These outcomes included the following: all-cause treatment discontinuation (risk ratio [RR], 0.70; 95% CI, 0.61-0.80; P < .001), at least 1 psychiatric hospitalization (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.61-0.90; P = .003), involvement in school or work (RR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.03-1.24; P = .01), total symptom severity (standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.32; 95% CI, -0.47 to -0.17; P < .001), positive symptom severity (SMD, -0.22; 95% CI, -0.32 to -0.11; P < .001), and negative symptom severity (SMD, -0.28; 95% CI, -0.42 to -0.14; P < .001). Superiority of EIS regarding all outcomes was evident at 6, 9 to 12, and 18 to 24 months of treatment (except for general symptom severity and depressive symptom severity at 18-24 months).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In early-phase psychosis, EIS are superior to TAU across all meta-analyzable outcomes. These results support the need for funding and use of EIS in patients with early-phase psychosis.

The beneficial effects of combining pharmacological and psychosocial treatment on remission and functional outcome in outpatients with schizophrenia

OBJECTIVE

The effects of pharmacological and psychosocial treatment on remission and the functional outcome in outpatients with schizophrenia were evaluated. Remission was assessed according to the criteria proposed by the Remission in Schizophrenia Working group and psychosocial functioning according to the Global Assessment of Functioning with a score > 60. Functional outcome was the result of these two variables.

METHOD

One hundred fifty two patients were randomized to receive either, antipsychotic treatment as usual (TAU) or social skills training and family psychoeducation in addition to TAU. A final sample of 119 patients: n = 68 in the social skills training group, and n = 51 in the TAU group completed the study protocol. Patients were assessed at baseline and at 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

At the end of the study, 80% of the patients fulfilled the criteria for symptomatic remission: 62 patients (91.2%) in the social skills training group in contrast to 34 patients (66.7%) in the TAU group. Functional improvement criteria were accomplished by 41 patients (34.5%) at the endpoint of the study. Forty of these patients (58.8%) belonged to social skills training and one patient to customary treatment (χ(2) = 41.7, df 1, p < 0.001) and when criteria for symptomatic remission and functional improvement were combined, 39 patients (97.5%) of the social skills training group and one patient (1.9%) of the customary treatment group achieved functional outcome.

CONCLUSION

The results emphasize the need for psychosocial interventions as conjoint to pharmacological treatment to improve functional outcome in schizophrenia patients.

Psychoeducation for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia can be a severe and chronic illness characterised by lack of insight and poor compliance with treatment. Psychoeducational approaches have been developed to increase patients' knowledge of, and insight into, their illness and its treatment. It is supposed that this increased knowledge and insight will enable people with schizophrenia to cope in a more effective way with their illness, thereby improving prognosis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of psychoeducational interventions compared with standard levels of knowledge provision.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (February 2010).

SELECTION CRITERIA

All relevant randomised controlled trials focusing on psychoeducation for schizophrenia and/or related serious mental illnesses involving individuals or groups. We excluded quasi-randomised trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors extracted data independently from included papers. We contacted authors of trials for additional and missing data. We calculated risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of homogeneous dichotomous data. We used a fixed-effects model for heterogeneous dichotomous data. Where possible we also calculated the numbers needed to treat (NNT), as well as weighted means for continuous data.

MAIN RESULTS

This review includes a total of 5142 participants (mostly inpatients) from 44 trials conducted between 1988 and 2009 (median study duration ˜ 12 weeks, risk of bias - moderate). We found that incidences of non-compliance were lower in the psychoeducation group in the short term (n = 1400, RR 0.52 CI 0.40 to 0.67, NNT 11 CI 9 to 16). This finding holds for the medium and long term. Relapse appeared to be lower in psychoeducation group (n = 1214, RR 0.70 CI 0.61 to 0.81, NNT 9 CI 7 to 14) and this also applied to readmission (n = 206, RR 0.71 CI 0.56 to 0.89, NNT 5 CI 4 to 13). Scale-derived data also suggested that psychoeducation promotes better social and global functioning. In the medium term, treating four people with schizophrenia with psychoeducation instead of standard care resulted in one additional person showing a clinical improvement. Evidence suggests that participants receiving psychoeducation are more likely to be satisfied with mental health services (n = 236, RR 0.24 CI 0.12 to 0.50, NNT 5 CI 5 to 8) and have improved quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Psychoeducation does seem to reduce relapse, readmission and encourage medication compliance, as well as reduce the length of hospital stay in these hospital-based studies of limited quality. The true size of effect is likely to be less than demonstrated in this review - but, nevertheless, some sort of psychoeducation could be clinically effective and potentially cost beneficial. It is not difficult to justify better, more applicable, research in this area aimed at fully investigating the effects of this promising approach.

Psychoeducation for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia can be a severe and chronic illness characterised by lack of insight and poor compliance with treatment. Psychoeducational approaches have been developed to increase patients' knowledge of, and insight into, their illness and its treatment. It is supposed that this increased knowledge and insight will enable people with schizophrenia to cope in a more effective way with their illness, thereby improving prognosis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of psychoeducational interventions compared with standard levels of knowledge provision.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (February 2010).

SELECTION CRITERIA

All relevant randomised controlled trials focusing on psychoeducation for schizophrenia and/or related serious mental illnesses involving individuals or groups. We excluded quasi-randomised trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors extracted data independently from included papers. We contacted authors of trials for additional and missing data. We calculated risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of homogeneous dichotomous data. We used a fixed-effects model for heterogeneous dichotomous data. Where possible we also calculated the numbers needed to treat (NNT), as well as weighted means for continuous data.

MAIN RESULTS

This review includes a total of 5142 participants (mostly inpatients) from 44 trials conducted between 1988 and 2009 (median study duration ˜ 12 weeks, risk of bias - moderate). We found that incidences of non-compliance were lower in the psychoeducation group in the short term (n = 1400, RR 0.52 CI 0.40 to 0.67, NNT 11 CI 9 to 16). This finding holds for the medium and long term. Relapse appeared to be lower in psychoeducation group (n = 1214, RR 0.70 CI 0.61 to 0.81, NNT 9 CI 7 to 14) and this also applied to readmission (n = 206, RR 0.71 CI 0.56 to 0.89, NNT 5 CI 4 to 13). Scale-derived data also suggested that psychoeducation promotes better social and global functioning. In the medium term, treating four people with schizophrenia with psychoeducation instead of standard care resulted in one additional person showing a clinical improvement. Evidence suggests that participants receiving psychoeducation are more likely to be satisfied with mental health services (n = 236, RR 0.24 CI 0.12 to 0.50, NNT 5 CI 5 to 8) and have improved quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Psychoeducation does seem to reduce relapse, readmission and encourage medication compliance, as well as reduce the length of hospital stay in these hospital-based studies of limited quality. The true size of effect is likely to be less than demonstrated in this review - but, nevertheless, some sort of psychoeducation could be clinically effective and potentially cost beneficial. It is not difficult to justify better, more applicable, research in this area aimed at fully investigating the effects of this promising approach.