Precision psychiatry: Promises made-Promises to be kept?

Real-world implementation of precision psychiatry: Transdiagnostic risk calculator for the automatic detection of individuals at-risk of psychosis

BACKGROUND

Risk estimation models integrated into Electronic Health Records (EHRs) can deliver innovative approaches in psychiatry, but clinicians' endorsement and their real-world usability are unknown. This study aimed to investigate the real-world feasibility of implementing an individualised, transdiagnostic risk calculator to automatically screen EHRs and detect individuals at-risk for psychosis.

METHODS

Feasibility implementation study encompassing an in-vitro phase (March 2018 to May 2018) and in-vivo phase (May 2018 to April 2019). The in-vitro phase addressed implementation barriers and embedded the risk calculator (predictors: age, gender, ethnicity, index cluster diagnosis, age*gender) into the local EHR. The in-vivo phase investigated the real-world feasibility of screening individuals accessing secondary mental healthcare at the South London and Maudsley NHS Trust. The primary outcome was adherence of clinicians to automatic EHR screening, defined by the proportion of clinicians who responded to alerts from the risk calculator, over those contacted.

RESULTS

In-vitro phase: implementation barriers were identified/overcome with clinician and service user engagement, and the calculator was successfully integrated into the local EHR through the CogStack platform. In-vivo phase: 3722 individuals were automatically screened and 115 were detected. Clinician adherence was 74% without outreach and 85% with outreach. One-third of clinicians responded to the first email (37.1%) or phone calls (33.7%). Among those detected, cumulative risk of developing psychosis was 12% at six-month follow-up.

CONCLUSION

This is the first implementation study suggesting that combining precision psychiatry and EHR methods to improve detection of individuals with emerging psychosis is feasible. Future psychiatric implementation research is urgently needed.

'Precision' or 'personalized' psychiatry: different terms - same content?

Due to the increased lifetime prevalence and personal, social, and economic burden of mental disorders, psychiatry is in need of a significant change in several aspects of its clinical and research approaches. Over the last few decades, the development of personalized / precision medicine in psychiatry focusing on tailored therapies that fit each patient's unique individual, physiological, and genetic profile has not achieved the same results as those obtained in other branches, such as oncology. The long-awaited revolution has not yet surfaced. There are various explanations for this including imprecise diagnostic criteria, incomplete understanding of the molecular pathology involved, absence of available clinical tools and, finally, the characteristics of the patient. Since then, the co-existence of the two terms has sparked a great deal of discussion around the definition and differentiation between the two types of psychiatry, as they often seem similar or even superimposable. Generally, the two terminologies are used indiscriminately, alternatively, and / or separately, within the same scientific works. In this paper, an overview is provided on the overlap between the application and meaning of the terms 'precision psychiatry' and 'personalized psychiatry'.