The relationship between ethnicity and service access, treatment uptake and the incidence of psychosis among people at ultra high risk for psychosis

Individualized pretest risk estimates to guide treatment decisions in patients with clinical high risk for psychotic disorders

INTRODUCTION

Clinical high risk for psychosis (CHR) states are associated with an increased risk of transition to psychosis. However, the predictive value of CHR screening interviews is dependent on pretest risk enrichment in referred patients. This poses a major obstacle to CHR outreach campaigns since they invariably lead to risk dilution through enhanced awareness. A potential compensatory strategy is to use estimates of individual pretest risk as a 'gatekeeper' for specialized assessment. We aimed to test a risk stratification model previously developed in London, UK (OASIS) and to train a new predictive model for the Swiss population.

METHOD

The sample was composed of 513 individuals referred for CHR assessment from six Swiss early psychosis detection services. Sociodemographic variables available at referral were used as predictors whereas the outcome variable was transition to psychosis.

RESULTS

Replication of the risk stratification model developed in OASIS resulted in poor performance (Harrel's c=0.51). Retraining resulted in moderate discrimination (Harrel's c=0.67) which significantly differentiated between different risk groups. The lowest risk group had a cumulative transition incidence of 6.4% (CI: 0-23.1%) over two years.

CONCLUSION

Failure to replicate the OASIS risk stratification model might reflect differences in the public health care systems and referral structures between Switzerland and London. Retraining resulted in a model with adequate discrimination performance. The developed model in combination with CHR assessment result, might be useful for identifying individuals with high pretest risk, who might benefit most from specialized intervention.

Mental Health Service Use Before First Diagnosis of a Psychotic Disorder

Importance

Characterizing mental health service use trajectories preceding diagnosis of a psychotic disorder may help identify individuals at highest risk and in which settings they are at highest risk.

Objective

To examine mental health service use and diagnostic trajectories before first diagnosis of psychotic disorder and identify utilization and diagnostic patterns.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This population-based, retrospective cohort study used linked provincial health administrative data. The sample included individuals aged 15 to 29 years diagnosed with a psychotic disorder in Ontario, Canada, between April 1, 2012, and March 31, 2018. These individuals were matched to individuals with a diagnosis of a mood disorder. Data were analyzed from November 2018 to November 2019.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcomes were rates, timing, and setting of mental health-related service use and associated diagnoses in the 3 years before the index disorder among individuals first diagnosed with a psychotic disorder compared with those first diagnosed with a mood disorder.

Results

A total of 10 501 individuals with a first diagnosis of psychotic disorder were identified (mean [SD] age, 21.55 [3.83] years; 72.1% male). A total of 72.2% of individuals had at least 1 mental health service visit during the 3 years before their first psychotic disorder diagnosis, which was significantly more than matched controls with a first mood disorder diagnosis (66.8%) (odds ratio [OR], 1.34; 95% CI, 1.26-1.42). Compared with individuals diagnosed with a mood disorder, individuals diagnosed with a psychotic disorder were significantly more likely to have had mental health-related hospital admissions (OR, 3.98; 95% CI, 3.43-4.62) and emergency department visits (OR, 2.27; 95% CI, 2.12-2.43) in the preceding 3 years. Those with psychotic disorders were more likely to have had prior diagnoses of substance use disorders (OR, 2.57; 95% CI, 2.35-2.81), other disorders (personality disorders, developmental disorders) (OR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.61-1.90), and self-harm (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.36-1.98) in the past 3 years compared with those diagnosed with mood disorders.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study found that in the 3 years prior to an index diagnosis, individuals with a first diagnosis of psychotic disorder had higher rates of mental health service use, particularly emergency department visits and hospitalizations, compared with individuals with a first diagnosis of a mood disorder. Individuals with psychotic disorders also had a greater number of premorbid diagnoses. Differences in health service utilization patterns between those with a first psychotic disorder diagnosis vs a first mood disorder diagnosis suggest distinct premorbid trajectories that could be useful for next steps in prediction and prevention research.

Advance statements in mental healthcare: time to close the evidence to practice gap

This article discusses advance statements in mental health care, which allow individuals with mental disorders to express their preferences for treatment during mental health crises. Despite the evidence supporting their effectiveness, their implementation in clinical practice remains limited. This article explores variations among advance statements, such as psychiatric advance directives (PADs), joint crisis plans (JCPs) and self-binding directives (SBDs), highlighting their content, development process and legal status. We outline the benefits of advance statements, including empowerment, early intervention, improved therapeutic relationships and reduced compulsory admissions. We then draw attention to the challenges that may contribute to their lack of implementation, including legal complexities, communication issues, cultural factors, potential inequities, healthcare provider knowledge, changing preferences, resource constraints, crisis responses, data privacy, family involvement, and long-term evaluation. In conclusion, advance statements offer significant benefits but require addressing these critical aspects to ensure ethical and effective use. Bridging the evidence-to-practice gap is essential, with a focus on implementation science. Integrating these tools into routine clinical practice can significantly benefit individuals with severe mental disorders and mental health systems.

Advance Statements for Black African and Caribbean people (AdStAC): protocol for an implementation study

BACKGROUND

The UK government committed to legislating for Advance Choice Documents/Advance Statements (ACD/AS) following their recommendation by the Independent Review of the MHA (2018). ACDs/AS are yet to be implemented in routine practice despite evidence and high demand; they are associated with improved therapeutic relationships and a reduction (25%, RR 0.75, CI 0.61-0.93) in compulsory psychiatric admission. Barriers to their implementation are well documented, ranging from low knowledge levels to logistical challenges in accessing the content during episodes of acute care. In the UK this is an issue for Black people, who experience detention rates disproportionately (over three times) higher than those of White British people and have poorer care experiences and outcomes. ACDs/AS allow for Black people to have their concerns heard by mental health professionals in a care system where they often feel their views are ignored. AdStAC aims to improve Black service users' experiences in mental health services in South London by co-producing and testing an ACD/AS implementation resource with Black service users, mental health professionals and carers/supporters of Black service users.

METHODS/DESIGN

The study will take place in South London, England over three phases: 1) formative work through stakeholder workshops; 2) co-production of resources through a consensus development exercise and working groups; and 3) testing of the resources using quality improvement (QI) methods. A lived experience advisory group, staff advisory group and project steering committee will support the study throughout. The implementation resources will comprise: advance choice document/advance statement (ACD/AS) documentation, stakeholder trainings, a manual for mental health professionals to facilitate the processes of creating and revising advance statements, and informatics development.

DISCUSSION

The implementation resources will help increase the likelihood of the new mental health legislation in England being implemented effectively; through aligning evidence-based medicine, policy and law to effectively provide positive clinical, social and financial outcomes for Black people, the National Health Service (NHS) and wider society. This study will likely benefit a wider group of people with severe mental illness, as when marginalised groups who are least engaged, can be supported with these strategies, then the strategies are likely to work for others.

Early intervention service systems for youth mental health: integrating pluripotentiality, clinical staging, and transdiagnostic lessons from early psychosis

Challenges associated with operationalising services for the at-risk mental state for psychosis solely in that same diagnostic silo are increasingly well recognised-namely, the differential risk for psychosis being a function of sampling enrichment strategies, declining transition rates to psychosis, questions regarding the validity of transition as an outcome, and the frequent development of non-psychotic disorders. However, recent epidemiological and clinical research suggests that not all threshold-level psychoses are likely to occur homotypically; early-stage non-psychotic syndromes might exhibit heterotypic shifts to a first episode of psychosis, without an identifiable at-risk mental state. These findings, along with the relevance of outcomes beyond traditional diagnoses or syndromes, have substantive implications for developing next-generation early intervention infrastructures. Along with the idea of general at-risk clinics for early-stage pluripotential syndromes, we examine how this reality might affect service design, such as the need for close linkage with centres of expertise for threshold-level disorders when transitions to later stages occur, the balance between generic and specific interventions amid the need for person-centred care, and the challenges this reorientation might pose for broader mental health systems.

Structural Racism and Inequities in Incidence, Course of Illness, and Treatment of Psychotic Disorders Among Black Americans

Psychotic disorders (e.g., schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder) are a leading cause of morbidity and premature mortality and an overlooked health inequity in the United States. European data indicate inequities in incidence, severity, and treatment of psychotic disorders, particularly for Black communities, that appear to be primarily attributable to social adversities. The dominant US narrative is that any observed differences are primarily a result of clinician bias and misdiagnosis. We propose that employing the framework of structural racism will prompt European and US research to converge and consider the multifaceted drivers of inequities in psychotic disorders among Black Americans. In particular, we describe how historical and contemporary practices of (1) racialized policing and incarceration, and (2) economic exploitation and disinvestment, which are already linked to other psychiatric disorders, likely contribute to risks and experiences of psychotic disorders among Black Americans. This framework can inform new strategies to (1) document the role of racism in the incidence, severity, and treatment of psychotic disorders; and (2) dismantle how racism operates in the United States, including defunding the police, abolishing carceral systems, and redirecting funds to invest in neighborhoods, housing, and community-based crisis response and mental health care. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(4):624-632. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306631).

The associations between migrant status and ethnicity and the identification of individuals at ultra-high risk for psychosis and transition to psychosis: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Migrant and ethnic minority populations exhibit a higher incidence of psychotic disorders. The Ultra-High Risk for psychosis (UHR) paradigm provides an opportunity to explore the stage at which such factors influence the development of psychosis. In this systematic review, we collate and appraise the literature on the association between ethnicity and migrant status and the rate of identification of individuals at UHR, as well as their rate of transition to psychosis.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review in the Ovid Medline, PsychINFO, Pubmed, CINAHL and EMBASE databases according to PRISMA guidelines. We included studies written in English that included an UHR cohort, provided a measure of ethnicity or migrant status, and examined the incidence, rate, or risk of UHR identification or transition to psychosis.

RESULTS

Of 2182 unique articles identified, seven fulfilled the criteria. One study found overrepresentation of UHR individuals from black ethnic groups, while another found underrepresentation. Two studies found increased rates of transition among certain ethnic groups and a further two found no association. Regarding migrant status, one study found that first-generation migrants were underrepresented in an UHR sample. Lastly, a lower transition rate in migrant populations was identified in one study, while two found no association.

CONCLUSION

Rates of UHR identification and transition according to ethnic and migrant status were inconsistent and insufficient to conclusively explain higher incidences of psychotic disorders among these groups. We discuss the clinical implications and avenues for future research, which is required to clarify the nature of the associations.

Prevention of psychosis: moving on from the at-risk mental state to universal primary prevention

The value of services for those with the 'At Risk Mental State for Psychosis' (ARMS) continues to be disputed. ARMS services have provided a valuable stimulus to academic research into the transition into psychosis. Furthermore, there is currently a welcome trend to transform such clinics into youth mental health services catering for the broader clientele of young people suffering from anxiety and depression, who already constitute the bulk of those seen at ARMS clinics. However, such services are never likely to make major inroads into preventing psychosis because they only reach a small proportion of those at risk. Evidence from medicine shows that avoiding exposure to factors which increase the risk of disease (e.g. poor nutrition, transmission of infection, tobacco smoking), produces greater public benefit than focussing efforts on individuals with, or about to develop, disease. We consider that the most productive approach for psychosis prevention is avoiding exposure to risk-increasing factors. The best-established risk factors for psychosis are obstetric events, childhood abuse, migration, city living, adverse life events and cannabis use. Some as city living, are likely proxies for an unknown causal factor(s) while preventing others such as childhood abuse is currently beyond our powers. The risk factor for psychosis which is most readily open to this approach is the use of cannabis. Therefore, as an initial step towards a strategy for universal primary prevention, we advocate public health campaigns to educate young people about the harms of regular use of high potency cannabis.

The reality of at risk mental state services: a response to recent criticisms

BACKGROUND

In the 1990s criteria were developed to detect individuals at high and imminent risk of developing a psychotic disorder. These are known as the at risk mental state, ultra high risk or clinical high risk criteria. Individuals meeting these criteria are symptomatic and help-seeking. Services for such individuals are now found worldwide. Recently Psychological Medicine published two articles that criticise these services and suggest that they should be dismantled or restructured. One paper also provides recommendations on how ARMS services should be operate.

METHODS

In this paper we draw on the existing literature in the field and present the perspective of some ARMS clinicians and researchers.

RESULTS

Many of the critics' arguments are refuted. Most of the recommendations included in the Moritz et al. paper are already occurring.

CONCLUSIONS

ARMS services provide management of current problems, treatment to reduce risk of onset of psychotic disorder and monitoring of mental state, including attenuated psychotic symptoms. These symptoms are associated with a range of poor outcomes. It is important to assess them and track their trajectory over time. A new approach to detection of ARMS individuals can be considered that harnesses broad youth mental health services, such as headspace in Australia, Jigsaw in Ireland and ACCESS Open Minds in Canada. Attention should also be paid to the physical health of ARMS individuals. Far from needing to be dismantled we feel that the ARMS approach has much to offer to improve the health of young people.

Migrant status and identification as ultra-high risk for psychosis and transitioning to a psychotic disorder

BACKGROUND

Certain migrant groups are more likely to develop a psychotic disorder compared to the native-born populations, and a younger age at migration is associated with greater risk. However, it is not known at which stage migration has an effect on the development of psychotic disorders. We examined whether migrants were more likely to be identified as ultra-high risk for psychosis (UHR) compared to native-born young people and whether migrant status was associated with the risk of transition to a full-threshold psychotic disorder.

METHODS

The cohort included all young people aged 15-24 who were identified as UHR at a specialist clinic over a five-year period (2012-16). Australian census data were used to obtain the at-risk population. Poisson regression was used to calculate rate ratios and Cox regression analysis determined hazard ratios.

RESULTS

467 young people were identified as UHR, of which 13.5% (n = 63) were born overseas. First-generation migrants were 2.6-fold less likely to be identified as UHR compared to Australian-born young people (IRR = 0.39, 95% CI [0.30, 0.51], P < 0.001). There was no difference between migrant and native-born young people in their risk of transitioning to a psychotic disorder (HR = 0.90, 95% CI [0.39, 2.08], P = 0.81).

CONCLUSIONS

UHR first-generation migrants may be under-accessing mental health services.

Unmet needs for treatment in 102 individuals with brief and limited intermittent psychotic symptoms (BLIPS): implications for current clinical recommendations

AIMS

To investigate clinical outcomes and unmet needs in individuals at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis presenting with Brief and Limited Intermittent Psychotic Symptoms (BLIPS).

METHODS

Prospective naturalistic long-term (up to 9 years) cohort study in individuals meeting BLIPS criteria at the Outreach And Support In South-London (OASIS) up to April 2016. Baseline sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, specific BLIPS features, preventive treatments received and clinical outcomes (psychotic and non-psychotic) were measured. Analyses included Kaplan Meier survival estimates and Cox regression methods.

RESULTS

One hundred and two BLIPS individuals were followed up to 9 years. Across BLIPS cases, 35% had an abrupt onset; 32% were associated with acute stress, 45% with lifetime trauma and 20% with concurrent illicit substance use. The vast majority (80%) of BLIPS individuals, despite being systematically offered cognitive behavioural therapy for psychosis, did not fully engage with it and did not receive the minimum effective dose. Only 3% of BLIPS individuals received the appropriate dose of cognitive behavioural therapy. At 4-year follow-up, 52% of the BLIPS individuals developed a psychotic disorder, 34% were admitted to hospital and 16% received a compulsory admission. At 3-year follow-up, 52% of them received an antipsychotic treatment; at 4-year follow-up, 26% of them received an antidepressant treatment. The presence of seriously disorganising and dangerous features was a strong poor prognostic factor.

CONCLUSIONS

BLIPS individuals display severe clinical outcomes beyond their very high risk of developing psychosis and show poor compliance with preventive cognitive behavioural therapy. BLIPS individuals have severe needs for treatment that are not met by current preventive strategies.