Long-term trajectories of positive and negative symptoms in first episode psychosis: A 10year follow-up study in the OPUS cohort

OBJECTIVE

Knowledge about course of illness can help clinicians to develop effective interventions and improve treatment outcomes. The goal of this study was to construct positive and negative symptom trajectories based on structured clinical assessments collected over 10years within a cohort of people with first episode psychosis.

METHOD

A cohort of 496 people with first episode psychosis (ICD-10, F20-28) originally recruited for the OPUS study (1998-2000) and treated in community psychiatric services were rated on clinical symptoms at 5 different occasions across ten years. Psychopathology was assessed using the Scales for Assessment of Positive and Negative Symptoms. Symptom trajectories were constructed using Latent Class Analysis.

RESULTS

Five distinct trajectories were identified for positive symptoms (response - 47%, delayed response - 12%, relapse - 15%, non-response - 13% and episodic response - 13%). Four distinct trajectories were identified for negative symptoms (response - 28%, delayed response - 19%, relapse - 26% and non-response - 27%). Multivariable regression analysis of baseline characteristics identified that longer duration of untreated psychosis (OR 1.27-1.47, p<0.05) and substance abuse (OR 3.47-5.90, p<0.01) were associated with poorer positive symptom trajectories (higher levels of psychotic symptoms) while poor social functioning (OR 1.34-5.55, p<0.05), disorganized symptoms (OR 2.01-2.38, p<0.05) and schizophrenia diagnosis (OR 5.70-8.86, p<0.05) were associated with poorer negative symptom trajectories (higher levels of negative symptoms). A proportion of people displayed significant changes in symptoms several years after diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Trajectories of illness for positive and negative symptoms were heterogeneous among people with first episode psychosis. Positive symptoms showed a general pattern of reduction and stabilization over time while negative symptoms typically showed less variation over the ten years. Results have implications for the focus, timing and length of interventions in first episode psychosis.

The effect of the mental health first-aid training course offered employees in Denmark: study protocol for a randomized waitlist-controlled superiority trial mixed with a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Studies show a high and growing prevalence of mental disorders in the population worldwide. 25% of the general population in Europe will during their lifetime experience symptoms related to a mental disorder. The Mental Health First Aid concept (MHFA) was founded in 2000 in Australia by Kitchener and Jorm, in order to provide the population with mental health first aid skills. The aim of the concept is, through an educational intervention (course), to increase confidence in how to help people suffering from mental health problems. Further, secondary aims are to increase the mental health literacy of the public by increasing knowledge, reduce stigma and initiate more supportive actions leading towards professional care. An investigation of the effect of MHFA offered a Danish population is needed.

METHODS

The design is a randomized waitlist-controlled superiority trial, in which 500 participants will be allocated to either the intervention group or the control group. The control group will attend the course six months later, hence waiting list design. From fall 2013 to spring 2014 participants will be educated to be "mental health first-aiders" following a manualized, two days MHFA course. All the participants will answer a questionnaire at base-line and at 6 months follow-up. The questionnaire is a back-translation of the questionnaire used in Australian trials. The trial will be complemented by a qualitative study, in which focus groups will be carried out.

DISCUSSION

Outcomes measured are sensitive to interpretation, hence a challenge to uniform. This trial will add to the use of a mixed-methods design and exemplify how it can strengthen the analysis and take up the challenge of a sensitive outcome.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT02334020.

The FOCUS trial: cognitive remediation plus standard treatment versus standard treatment for patients at ultra-high risk for psychosis: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background

Cognitive deficits are a distinct feature among people at ultra-high risk (UHR) for psychosis and pose a barrier to functional recovery. Insufficient evidence exists on how to ameliorate these cognitive deficits in patients at UHR for psychosis and hence improve daily living and quality of life. The aim of the trial is to investigate whether cognitive remediation can improve cognitive and psychosocial function in patients at UHR for psychosis.

Methods

The FOCUS trial (Function and Overall Cognition in Ultra-high risk States) is a randomised, parallel group, observer-blinded clinical trial enrolling 126 patients meeting the standardised criteria of being at UHR for psychosis. Patients are recruited from psychiatric in- and outpatient facilities in the Copenhagen catchment area. Patients are randomised to one of the two treatment arms: cognitive remediation plus standard treatment versus standard treatment. The cognitive remediation consists of 24 weekly group-based and manualised sessions targeting neurocognition and social cognition. In addition to the group sessions, the patients will be offered 12 individual sessions aiming at maximising the transfer of the effects of the cognitive training to their everyday lives. Follow-up assessments will be conducted at 6 and 12 months after randomisation. The primary outcome is the composite score on the Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia at cessation of treatment after 6 months. Secondary outcomes are social and daily functioning, psychosis-like symptoms, negative symptomatology, and depressive symptomatology as measured with the Personal and Social Performance Scale, Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale-Expanded Version, Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms, and the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale.

Discussion

This is the first trial to evaluate the effects of neurocognitive and social cognitive remediation in UHR patients. The FOCUS trial results will provide evidence on the effect of targeted and comprehensive cognitive rehabilitation on cognition, daily living, and symptomatology as well as long-term outcome in preventing transition to psychosis in UHR patients.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT 02098408. Date of registration 18 March 2014.

Change in cannabis use, clinical symptoms and social functioning among patients with first-episode psychosis: a 5-year follow-up study of patients in the OPUS trial

BACKGROUND

Several studies indicate that cannabis use among patients with psychotic disorders is associated with worse outcome, but only a few studies have controlled for baseline condition and medication.

METHOD

At 5-year follow-up, interviews were carried out with 314 first-episode psychosis patients included in the OPUS trial. The patients included were in the age range of 18 to 45 years old and 59% were male. Cannabis use was extracted from the Schedule for Clinical Assessment in Neuropsychiatry. At follow-up, the patients were divided into different groups according to the variable cannabis use: abstainers, stoppers, starters and continuers. Psychotic, negative and disorganized dimensions (ranging from zero to five) were calculated for each of the four groups based on the Schedule for the Assessment of Positive and Negative Symptoms in Schizophrenia.

RESULTS

Cannabis users were younger (24.6 years v. 27.4 years, p < 0.001) and had a lower level of education. At the 5-year follow-up, users of cannabis had higher scores on the psychotic dimension [difference 0.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41-1.53, p = 0.001] and lower levels of the Global Assessment of Functioning (difference 8.26, 95% CI 2.13-14.39, p = 0.01). Those who stopped using cannabis between entry and 5-year follow-up had a significantly lower level of psychotic symptoms at 5-year follow-up even after controlling for baseline level of psychotic symptoms and for insufficient antipsychotic medication (adjusted difference in psychotic dimension -1.04, 95% CI -1.77 to -0.31, p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Continuous cannabis use was associated with higher levels of psychotic symptoms after 5 years, and this association was only partly explained by insufficient antipsychotic medication.

Predictors of recovery in first episode psychosis: the OPUS cohort at 10 year follow-up

BACKGROUND

Recovery, the optimal goal in treatment, is the attainment of both symptomatic and functional remission over a sustained period of time. Identification of factors that promote recovery can help develop interventions that facilitate good outcomes for people with first episode psychosis.

AIM

To examine long-term outcomes within a cohort of people with first episode psychosis in relation to symptom remission, functioning and recovery, 10 years after diagnosis.

METHOD

The study had a prospective design. Participants from the OPUS trial (1998-2000) (n=496) completed a series of interviews and questionnaires to measure current levels of psychopathology and social/vocational functioning, ten years after diagnosis. Predictors of recovery were identified using socio-demographic and clinical characteristics collected at baseline.

RESULTS

A total of 304 participants were interviewed, giving a follow-up rate of 61%. A total of 42 people (14%) met the criteria for symptomatic and psychosocial recovery at 10 years. A multivariable binary logistic regression analysis indicated that baseline predictors accounted for 22% of the variance of full recovery. Lower severity of negative symptoms at baseline (Odds Ratio (OR) 0.53, 95% confidence interval CI 0.36-0.78, p<0.001) and earlier age of diagnosis (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.86-0.99, p<0.05) predicted better rates of recovery at 10 years.

CONCLUSION

Results of this study indicated that negative symptoms could play a central role in the process of recovery from schizophrenia. A challenge for clinicians and researchers is to understand the mechanisms behind negative symptoms and develop interventions that can prevent or ameliorate these symptoms in order to promote recovery.

Specialized psychosocial treatment plus treatment as usual (TAU) versus TAU for patients with cannabis use disorder and psychosis: the CapOpus randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Cannabis abuse in psychotic patients is associated with rehospitalizations, reduced adherence and increased symptom severity. Previous psychosocial interventions have been ineffective in cannabis use, possibly because of low sample sizes and short interventions. We investigated whether adding CapOpus to treatment as usual (TAU) reduces cannabis use in patients with cannabis use disorder and psychosis. Method A total of 103 patients with psychosis and cannabis use disorder were centrally randomized to 6 months of CapOpus plus TAU (n = 52) or TAU (n = 51). CapOpus consisted mainly of motivational interviewing and cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT). TAU was targeted primarily at the psychotic disorder. The primary outcome was self-reported days with cannabis use in the preceding month.

RESULTS

Pre-randomization cannabis use frequency was 14.9 [95% confidence interval (CI) 12.7-17.1] days/month. Post-treatment, the ratio of days/month with cannabis use in CapOpus versus TAU was 0.76 (95% CI 0.38-1.50) (p = 0.42), and 0.80 (95% CI 0.21-3.10) (p = 0.75) at the 4-month follow-up. From 46.4 (95% CI 36.4-56.3) monthly joints pre-randomization, consumption fell to 27.3 (95% CI 12.6-41.9) joints in CapOpus and 48.2 (95% CI 31.8-64.6) in TAU (p = 0.06). Follow-up amounts were 28.4 (95% CI 13.5-43.2) and 41.6 (95% CI 25.2-58.0) joints (p = 0.23). Several subgroup analyses suggested benefits of CapOpus.

CONCLUSIONS

CapOpus did not reduce the frequency, but possibly the amount, of cannabis use. This is similar to the findings of previous trials in this population. Implementation of CapOpus-type interventions is thus not warranted at present but subgroup analyses call for further trials.