Abstract

BackgroundThere is a dearth of information on people with first-episode psychosis who do not access specialized early psychosis intervention (EPI) services. With this notable gap in knowledge comes the implicit assumption that nearly all cases of first-episode psychosis are detected and treated by EPI services. We sought to estimate the proportion of incident cases of non-affective psychosis who do not access these services, and to examine factors associated with EPI admission.MethodsUsing health administrative data, we constructed a retrospective cohort of incident cases of non-affective psychosis in the catchment area of the Prevention and Early Intervention Program for Psychoses (PEPP) in London, Ontario between 1997 and 2013. This cohort was linked to primary data from PEPP to identify EPI-users. We used multivariate logistic regression to model socio-demographic and service factors associated with EPI admission.ResultsOver 50% of suspected cases of non-affective psychosis did not have contact with the EPI program for screening or admission. Our findings suggest a clear gradient by age, with a decreasing likelihood of being treated in the EPI program with increasing age strata (age 46–50 years vs. age 16–20 years: OR=0.03, 95%CI=0.01–0.05). EPI-users are more likely to be male (OR=1.58, 95%CI=1.24–2.01), and less likely to live in areas of socioeconomic deprivation (OR=0.51, 95%CI=0.36–0.73). EPI-users also had a higher odds of psychiatrist involvement at the index diagnosis (OR=7.35, 95%CI=5.43–10.00), had a lower odds of receiving the index diagnosis in an outpatient setting (OR=0.50, 95%CI=0.38–0.65), and had a lower odds of prior alcohol-related (OR=0.42, 95%CI=0.28–0.63) and substance-related (OR=0.68, 95%CI=0.50–0.93) disorders.DiscussionMuch of the prior research on EPI services is predicated on the belief that nearly all patients with first-episode psychosis are represented in these services, with little discussion or consideration of people who may be receiving care elsewhere in the health system. We need greater consideration of patients with first-episode psychosis who are not accessing EPI services – our findings suggest this group is sizable, and there may be socio-demographic and clinical disparities in access. Non-psychiatric health professionals could be targeted with interventions aimed at increasing detection and referral rates.

Highlights

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

  • In early psychosis, coordinated specialty care (CSC) is superior to Treatment as Usual (TAU) across all meta-analyzable, highly relevant outcomes with small-to-medium effect sizes

  • There is a dearth of information on people with first-episode psychosis who do not access specialized early psychosis intervention (EPI) services

Read more

Summary

Background

Individuals with mood and psychotic disorders treated in hospital psychiatric units have high rates of discontinuing treatment following discharge, a time that poses substantial risks of serious and even life threatening adverse outcomes. Hospital provider care transition practices believed to improve transitions include communication with outpatient providers, scheduling timely appointments for outpatient follow-up care, forwarding case summaries to aftercare providers, and involving family or support persons in discharge planning. While these are standards of care, little is known about how often they are adequately delivered and their impact on post-discharge aftercare adherence. The medical records showed evidence of inpatient providers communicating with outpatient providers 64% (n=139) of the time. There was evidence of an outpatient appointment scheduled within seven days of discharge for 81% (n=176) of the sample. A case summary was made available to the aftercare provider

Findings

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.