Do fewer males present to clinical high-risk services for psychosis relative to first-episode services?

We need to talk: a qualitative inquiry into pathways to care for young men at ultra-high risk for psychosis

Introduction

It is known from the literature that men are slower to seek help and staying engaged in mental health care compared to women. Seeing that in psychosis, men more often than women have insidious onsets but also a more malign illness course, it is important to find ways to improve timely help-seeking. The aim of this study was to explore barriers and facilitators for help-seeking in young male persons struggling with early signs of psychosis.

Methods

Qualitative interviews with nine young men who suffer from a first episode of psychosis or psychosis risk symptoms.

Results

Male stereotypical ideals, significant others, and knowledge of symptoms and where to get help as well characteristics of symptom trajectories appeared to be important determinants of help-seeking behavior.

Discussion

Interviews indicated that help-seeking in the participants was delayed first, because of reluctancy to disclose distress and second, because significant others were unable to accurately recognize symptoms. Information, awareness, and easy access to care remain important in early detection and intervention in psychosis and psychosis risk. However, more emphasis should be placed on de-stigmatizing mental health problems in men and aiming information specifically at them.

Substance use Specificities in Women with Psychosis: A Critical Review

BACKGROUND

Women with schizophrenia or other psychotic disorders differ from male patients in many respects, including psychopathology, prognosis, disease course, and substance use comorbidities. Most studies performed to date to investigate the association between drug use and psychosis have not evaluated gender differences, although this has started to change in recent years.

METHODS

We briefly summarize the available evidence on gender differences in drug use and substance use disorders (SUD) in psychotic patients during the early phases of the psychotic illness and during the course of schizophrenia.

RESULTS

Substance use and SUD are both less prevalent in women, both in the general population and at all phases of the psychotic spectrum. Some studies suggest that SUD may be under diagnosed in female patients, in part due to their more vulnerable profile. Substance use, especially cannabis, may more negatively impact females, especially on the disease course and prognosis. The available data suggest that it may be more difficult to treat SUD in female patients with schizophrenia, which could negatively impact prognosis.

CONCLUSION

Women with concomitant psychotic illness and SUD comprise a highly vulnerable subgroup. This should be considered when selecting the treatment approach, especially in the early phases of the illness, to ensure better outcomes.

Gender differences of patients at-risk for psychosis regarding symptomatology, drug use, comorbidity and functioning – Results from the EU-GEI study

Background:

Gender differences in symptomatology in chronic schizophrenia and first episode psychosis patients have often been reported. However, little is known about gender differences in those at risk of psychotic disorders. This study investigated gender differences in symptomatology, drug use, comorbidity (i.e. substance use, affective and anxiety disorders) and global functioning in patients with an at-risk mental state (ARMS) for psychosis.

Methods:

The sample consisted of 336 ARMS patients (159 women) from the prodromal work package of the EUropean network of national schizophrenia networks studying Gene-Environment Interactions (EU-GEI; 11 centers). Clinical symptoms, drug use, comorbidity and functioning were assessed at first presentation to an early detection center using structured interviews.

Results:

In unadjusted analyses, men were found to have significantly higher rates of negative symptoms and current cannabis use while women showed higher rates of general psychopathology and more often displayed comorbid affective and anxiety disorders. No gender differences were found for global functioning. The results generally did not change when corrected for possible cofounders (e.g. cannabis use). However, most differences did not withstand correction for multiple testing.

Conclusions:

Findings indicate that gender differences in symptomatology and comorbidity in ARMS are similar to those seen in overt psychosis and in healthy controls. However, observed differences are small and would only be reliably detected in studies with high statistical power. Moreover, such small effects would likely not be clinically meaningful.

Sex and gender differences in schizophrenic psychoses-a critical review

Many sex and gender differences in schizophrenic psychoses have been reported, but few have been soundly replicated. A stable finding is the later age of onset in women compared to men. Gender differences in symptomatology, comorbidity, and neurocognition seem to reflect findings in the general population. There is increasing evidence for estrogens being psychoprotective in women and for hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal dysfunction in both sexes.More methodologically sound, longitudinal, multi-domain, interdisciplinary research investigating both sex (biological) and gender (psychosocial) factors is required to better understand the different pathogenesis and etiologies of schizophrenic psychoses in women and men, thereby leading to better tailored treatments and improved outcomes.

Lack of evidence to favor specific preventive interventions in psychosis: a network meta-analysis

Preventing psychosis in patients at clinical high risk may be a promising avenue for pre-emptively ameliorating outcomes of the most severe psychiatric disorder. However, information on how each preventive intervention fares against other currently available treatment options remains unavailable. The aim of the current study was to quantify the consistency and magnitude of effects of specific preventive interventions for psychosis, comparing different treatments in a network meta-analysis. PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and unpublished/grey literature were searched up to July 18, 2017, to identify randomized controlled trials conducted in individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis, comparing different types of intervention and reporting transition to psychosis. Two reviewers independently extracted data. Data were synthesized using network meta-analyses. The primary outcome was transition to psychosis at different time points and the secondary outcome was treatment acceptability (dropout due to any cause). Effect sizes were reported as odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Sixteen studies (2,035 patients, 57% male, mean age 20.1 years) reported on risk of transition. The treatments tested were needs-based interventions (NBI); omega-3 + NBI; ziprasidone + NBI; olanzapine + NBI; aripiprazole + NBI; integrated psychological interventions; family therapy + NBI; D-serine + NBI; cognitive behavioural therapy, French & Morrison protocol (CBT-F) + NBI; CBT-F + risperidone + NBI; and cognitive behavioural therapy, van der Gaag protocol (CBT-V) + CBT-F + NBI. The network meta-analysis showed no evidence of significantly superior efficacy of any one intervention over the others at 6 and 12 months (insufficient data were available after 12 months). Similarly, there was no evidence for intervention differences in acceptability at either time point. Tests for inconsistency were non-significant and sensitivity analyses controlling for different clustering of interventions and biases did not materially affect the interpretation of the results. In summary, this study indicates that, to date, there is no evidence that any specific intervention is particularly effective over the others in preventing transition to psychosis. Further experimental research is needed.

Deconstructing Vulnerability for Psychosis: Meta-Analysis of Environmental Risk Factors for Psychosis in Subjects at Ultra High-Risk

Background

Subjects at ultra high-risk (UHR) for psychosis have an enhanced vulnerability to develop the disorder but the risk factors accounting for this accrued risk are undetermined.

Method

Systematic review of associations between genetic or environmental risk factors for psychosis that are widely established in the literature and UHR state, based on comparisons to controls.

Results

Forty-four studies encompassing 170 independent datasets and 54 risk factors were included. There were no studies on association between genetic or epigenetic risk factors and the UHR state that met the inclusion criteria. UHR subjects were more likely to show obstetric complications, tobacco use, physical inactivity, childhood trauma/emotional abuse/physical neglect, high perceived stress, childhood and adolescent low functioning, affective comorbidities, male gender, single status, unemployment and low educational level as compared to controls.

Conclusions

The increased vulnerability of UHR subjects can be related to environmental risk factors like childhood trauma, adverse life events and affective dysfunction. The role of genetic and epigenetic risk factors awaits clarification.