Commentary: Preventive Treatments for Psychosis: Umbrella Review (Just the Evidence)

Screening for psychosis risk in primary mental health care services - Implementation, prevalence and recovery trajectories

OBJECTIVES

Early interventions improve outcomes for people at high risk of psychosis and are likely to be cost saving. This group tends to seek help for emotional problems - depression and anxiety - via primary care services, where early detection methods are poor. We sought to determine prevalence rates of high risk for psychosis in UK primary care mental health services and clinical outcomes following routinely delivered psychological therapies.

METHODS

We used a brief screen designed for settings with low base rates and significant time constraints to determine prevalence of high risk for psychosis in UK 'Talking Therapies' services. We examined socio-demographic characteristics, presenting problems and recovery trajectories for this group, compared with people not at risk of psychosis.

RESULTS

A 2-item screen selected for specificity yielded a prevalence rate of 3% in primary care mental health services. People at elevated risk of psychosis were younger and more likely to report at least one long-term physical condition. This group presented with higher levels of depression, anxiety and trauma symptoms at assessment and were less likely to have recovered at the end of treatment, compared to people not at risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Very brief screening tools can be implemented in busy health care settings. The 3% of referrals to UK primary care psychological therapies services at elevated risk of psychosis typically present with more severe symptoms and greater levels of comorbidity and may require augmented interventions to recover fully.

A Sequential Adaptive Intervention Strategy Targeting Remission and Functional Recovery in Young People at Ultrahigh Risk of Psychosis: The Staged Treatment in Early Psychosis (STEP) Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial

Importance

Clinical trials have not established the optimal type, sequence, and duration of interventions for people at ultrahigh risk of psychosis.

Objective

To determine the effectiveness of a sequential and adaptive intervention strategy for individuals at ultrahigh risk of psychosis.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The Staged Treatment in Early Psychosis (STEP) sequential multiple assignment randomized trial took place within the clinical program at Orygen, Melbourne, Australia. Individuals aged 12 to 25 years who were seeking treatment and met criteria for ultrahigh risk of psychosis according to the Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States were recruited between April 2016 and January 2019. Of 1343 individuals considered, 342 were recruited.

Interventions

Step 1: 6 weeks of support and problem solving (SPS); step 2: 20 weeks of cognitive-behavioral case management (CBCM) vs SPS; and step 3: 26 weeks of CBCM with fluoxetine vs CBCM with placebo with an embedded fast-fail option of ω-3 fatty acids or low-dose antipsychotic medication. Individuals who did not remit progressed through these steps; those who remitted received SPS or monitoring for up to 12 months.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Global Functioning: Social and Role scales (primary outcome), Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms, Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, quality of life, transition to psychosis, and remission and relapse rates.

Results

The sample comprised 342 participants (198 female; mean [SD] age, 17.7 [3.1] years). Remission rates, reflecting sustained symptomatic and functional improvement, were 8.5%, 10.3%, and 11.4% at steps 1, 2, and 3, respectively. A total of 27.2% met remission criteria at any step. Relapse rates among those who remitted did not significantly differ between SPS and monitoring (step 1: 65.1% vs 58.3%; step 2: 37.7% vs 47.5%). There was no significant difference in functioning, symptoms, and transition rates between SPS and CBCM and between CBCM with fluoxetine and CBCM with placebo. Twelve-month transition rates to psychosis were 13.5% (entire sample), 3.3% (those who ever remitted), and 17.4% (those with no remission).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this sequential multiple assignment randomized trial, transition rates to psychosis were moderate, and remission rates were lower than expected, partly reflecting the ambitious criteria set and challenges with real-world treatment fidelity and adherence. While all groups showed mild to moderate functional and symptomatic improvement, this was typically short of remission. While further adaptive trials that address these challenges are needed, findings confirm substantial and sustained morbidity and reveal relatively poor responsiveness to existing treatments.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02751632.

Preventive interventions for individuals at ultra high risk for psychosis: An updated and extended meta-analysis

Intervention at the earliest illness stage, in ultra or clinical high-risk individuals, or indicated prevention, currently represents the most promising strategy to ameliorate, delay or prevent psychosis. We review the current state of evidence and conduct a broad-spectrum meta-analysis of various outcomes: transition to psychosis, attenuated positive and negative psychotic symptoms, mania, depression, anxiety, general psychopathology, symptom-related distress, functioning, quality of life, and treatment acceptability. 26 randomized controlled trials were included. Meta-analytically pooled interventions reduced transition rate (risk ratio [RR] = 0.57, 95%CI 0.41-0.81) and attenuated positive psychotic symptoms at 12-months (standardized mean difference = -0.15, 95%CI = -0.28--0.01). When stratified by intervention type (pharmacological, psychological), only the pooled effect of psychological interventions on transition rate was significant. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) was associated with a reduction in incidence at 12-months (RR = 0.52, 95%CI = 0.33-0.82) and 18-48-months (RR = 0.60, 95%CI = 0.42-0.84), but not 6-months. Findings at 12-months and 18-48-months were robust in sensitivity and subgroup analyses. All other outcomes were non-significant. To date, effects of trialed treatments are specific to transition and, a lesser extent, attenuated positive symptoms, highlighting the future need to target other symptom domains and functional outcomes. Sound evidence supports CBT in reducing transition and the value of intervening at this illness stage. STUDY REGISTRATION: Research Registry ID: reviewregistry907.