Programme fidelity of specialized early intervention in Denmark

A comparison of the National Clinical Audit of Psychosis 2019/2020 standards and First Episode Psychosis Services Fidelity Scale 1.0

AIM

The authors compare two approaches to assessment of the quality of early psychosis intervention services, the National Clinical Audit of Psychosis used in the United Kingdom and the First Episode Psychosis Services Fidelity Scale used in North America and Europe.

METHODS

We compare the two approaches on the source of standards, measurement type, data collection, time requirements, scoring and reliability. Finally, we review their strengths and limitations.

RESULTS

Both measures are based on standards derived from the same research evidence base. Both methods rely on data from health records and administrative data. The audit is supplemented with user survey data, the fidelity scale with clinician interviews. The audit requires more time. The audit is based on quality indicators rated as present or absent which yields a statistical benchmark. The Fidelity Scale is based on quality indicators that are rated on a five-point scale yielding a standards-based measure. The two methods cover similar service components, but the FEPS-FS has a broader coverage of team functioning. The National audit also collects data on the user experience directly from patients. The fidelity scale has achieved good to excellent inter-rater reliability, the reliability of the audit has not been tested.

CONCLUSIONS

Both methods have face validity and provide reliable and useful measures of quality of care. The NCAP works in the context of a single provider health system, the FEPS-FS works in a more variable health system. Comparing the two systems in the field would support international comparison of standards of care.

The Impact of Policy Changes, Dedicated Funding and Implementation Support on Early Intervention Programs for Psychosis

INTRODUCTION

Early intervention services for psychosis (EIS) are associated with improved clinical and economic outcomes. In Quebec, clinicians led the development of EIS from the late 1980s until 2017 when the provincial government announced EIS-specific funding, implementation support and provincial standards. This provides an interesting context to understand the impacts of policy commitments on EIS. Our primary objective was to describe the implementation of EIS three years after this increased political involvement.

METHODS

This cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted in 2020 through a 161-question online survey, modeled after our team's earlier surveys, on the following themes: program characteristics, accessibility, program operations, clinical services, training/supervision, and quality assurance. Descriptive statistics were performed. When relevant, we compared data on programs founded before and after 2017.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight of 33 existing EIS completed the survey. Between 2016 and 2020, the proportion of Quebec's population having access to EIS rose from 46% to 88%; >1,300 yearly admissions were reported by surveyed EIS, surpassing governments' epidemiological estimates. Most programs set accessibility targets; adopted inclusive intake criteria and an open referral policy; engaged in education of referral sources. A wide range of biopsychosocial interventions and assertive outreach were offered by interdisciplinary teams. Administrative/organisational components were less widely implemented, such as clinical/administrative data collection, respecting recommended patient-to-case manager ratios and quality assurance.

CONCLUSION

Increased governmental implementation support including dedicated funding led to widespread implementation of good-quality, accessible EIS. Though some differences were found between programs founded before and after 2017, there was no overall discernible impact of year of implementation. Persisting challenges to collecting data may impede monitoring, data-informed decision-making, and quality improvement. Maintaining fidelity and meeting provincial standards may prove challenging as programs mature and adapt to their catchment area's specificities and as caseloads increase. Governmental incidence estimates may need recalculation considering recent epidemiological data.

The Danish OPUS Early Intervention Services for First-Episode Psychosis: A Phase 4 Prospective Cohort Study With Comparison of Randomized Trial and Real-World Data

OBJECTIVE

The Danish OPUS trial showed significant efficacy of early intervention services for first-episode schizophrenia spectrum disorders compared with standard treatment, leading to implementation of the OPUS intervention in clinical practice. The authors sought to determine whether the effectiveness of OPUS treatment in real-world clinical practice is comparable to the efficacy seen in the trial.

METHODS

The study compared patients who received OPUS treatment as part of the original randomized trial to those who received standard treatment in the trial (the control group) and those who received OPUS treatment after it was implemented in Denmark. The authors investigated whether the three groups differed on register-based outcomes, such as use of secondary health care, functional outcomes, and death. Analyses were adjusted for relevant confounders.

RESULTS

Compared with trial study participants, patients who received OPUS treatment after implementation (N=3,328) had a tendency toward lower mortality (hazard ratio=0.60, 95% CI=0.33, 1.09), fewer and shorter psychiatric admissions, and possibly fewer filled prescriptions of antipsychotics and other psycholeptics after 4 or 5 years. While at first less likely to be working or studying, patients who received postimplementation OPUS treatment eventually had higher odds of working than did those in the OPUS trial (after 5 years, odds ratio=1.49, 95% CI=1.07, 2.09). The odds of being in a couple relationship were also higher among patients in the postimplementation group than those in the trial. Other outcomes showed less clear associations with treatment group. Generally, the control group in the trial fared worse than both of the OPUS treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Not only did OPUS treatment maintain its efficacy after it was implemented as a standard treatment, it paralleled or surpassed many of the effects observed when the OPUS intervention was delivered in a randomized trial. The study results provide further evidence in support of implementation and funding of early intervention services worldwide.

The utility of a fidelity measure to monitor implementation of new early psychosis services across Australia

AIM

Early psychosis delivery models have proliferated worldwide, but there is limited research into establishing model fidelity. In this context, this article aims to describe the development and implementation of a fidelity tool in a national network of early psychosis services across Australia-the headspace Early Psychosis program.

METHODS

Following a detailed consultation process, and based on the Australian Early Psychosis model, an 80-item Early Psychosis Prevention and Intervention Centre Model Integrity Tool (EMIT) was developed along with predefined thresholds for fidelity. The tool was used to assess adherence to the model in six clusters of service sites across Australia. Ratings on the EMIT were informed by interviews with site staff and young people receiving the service, routinely collected data and site policies and procedures.

RESULTS

All six clusters of headspace Early Psychosis programs participated in five fidelity assessments across a period of two and a half years. In the initial two visits, the average fidelity score was in the 'low' fidelity range (i.e., <75%). By the fifth fidelity visit, the network average improved to 92.35%, reflecting 'superior' fidelity.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of the longitudinal fidelity assessments indicate the successful implementation of the Australian Early Psychosis model across the headspace Early Psychosis program. Utilisation of ongoing fidelity assessments has proved an effective method to improve and maintain adherence to the model.

International application of standards for health care quality, access and evaluation of services for early intervention in psychotic disorders

AIM

Standards for health care quality, access and evaluation of early intervention in psychosis services are required to assess implementation, provide accountability to service users and funders and support quality assurance. The aim of this article is to review the application of standards in Europe and North America.

METHODS

Descriptive methods will be used to illustrate the organizational context in which standards are being applied and used, specific measures being applied and results so far.

RESULTS

Both fidelity scales and quality indicators of health care are being used. Fidelity scales are being applied in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Italy and United States. In England, quality indicators derived from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance are being used.

CONCLUSION

In the last 4 years, significant progress has been made in the development and application of measures that assess quality and access to evidence-based practices for early intervention in psychosis services. This represents an important step towards providing accountability, improving outcomes and service user experience. The methods used allow for comparison between the services that are assessed with the same methods, but there is a need to compare the different methods. Further research is also required to explore links between quality of care and outcomes for community mental health services that deliver early intervention in psychotic disorders.

Où en sommes-nous? An Overview of Successes and Challenges after 30 Years of Early Intervention Services for Psychosis in Quebec: Où en sommes-nous? Un aperçu des réussites et des problèmes après 30 ans de services d'intervention précoce pour la psychose au Québec

INTRODUCTION

Over the last 30 years, early intervention services (EIS) for first-episode psychosis (FEP) were gradually implemented in the province of Quebec. Such implementation occurred without provincial standards/guidelines and policy commitment to EIS until 2017. Although the literature highlights essential elements for EIS, studies conducted elsewhere reveal that important EIS components are often missing. No thorough review of Quebec EIS practices has ever been conducted, a gap we sought to address.

METHODS

Adopting a cross-sectional descriptive study design, an online survey was distributed to 18 EIS that existed in Quebec in 2016 to collect data on clinical, administrative, training, and research variables. Survey responses were compared with existing EIS service delivery recommendations.

RESULTS

Half of Quebec's population had access to EIS, with some regions having no programs. Most programs adhered to essential components of EIS. However, divergence from expert recommendations occurred with respect to variables such as open referral processes and patient-clinician ratio. Nonurban EIS encountered additional challenges related to their geography and lower population densities, which impacted their team size/composition and intensity of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Most Quebec EIS offer adequate services but lack resources and organizational support to adhere to some core components. Recently, the provincial government has created EIS guidelines, invested in the development of new programs and offered implementation support from the National Centre of Excellence in Mental Health. These changes, along with continued mentoring and networking of clinicians and researchers, can help all Quebec EIS to attain and maintain recommended quality standards.