Implementing and Evaluating a National Integrated Digital Registry and Clinical Decision Support System in Early Intervention in Psychosis Services (Early Psychosis Informatics Into Care): Co-Designed Protocol

BACKGROUND

Early intervention in psychosis (EIP) services are nationally mandated in England to provide multidisciplinary care to people experiencing first-episode psychosis, which disproportionately affects deprived and ethnic minority youth. Quality of service provision varies by region, and people from historically underserved populations have unequal access. In other disease areas, including stroke and dementia, national digital registries coupled with clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) have revolutionized the delivery of equitable, evidence-based interventions to transform patient outcomes and reduce population-level disparities in care. Given psychosis is ranked the third most burdensome mental health condition by the World Health Organization, it is essential that we achieve the same parity of health improvements.

OBJECTIVE

This paper reports the protocol for the program development phase of this study, in which we aimed to co-design and produce an evidence-based, stakeholder-informed framework for the building, implementation, piloting, and evaluation of a national integrated digital registry and CDSS for psychosis, known as EPICare (Early Psychosis Informatics into Care).

METHODS

We conducted 3 concurrent work packages, with reciprocal knowledge exchange between each. In work package 1, using a participatory co-design framework, key stakeholders (clinicians, academics, policy makers, and patient and public contributors) engaged in 4 workshops to review, refine, and identify a core set of essential and desirable measures and features of the EPICare registry and CDSS. Using a modified Delphi approach, we then developed a consensus of data priorities. In work package 2, we collaborated with National Health Service (NHS) informatics teams to identify relevant data currently captured in electronic health records, understand data retrieval methods, and design the software architecture and data model to inform future implementation. In work package 3, observations of stakeholder workshops and individual interviews with representative stakeholders (n=10) were subject to interpretative qualitative analysis, guided by normalization process theory, to identify factors likely to influence the adoption and implementation of EPICare into routine practice.

RESULTS

Stage 1 of the EPICare study took place between December 2021 and September 2022. The next steps include stage 2 building, piloting, implementation, and evaluation of EPICare in 5 demonstrator NHS Trusts serving underserved and diverse populations with substantial need for EIP care in England. If successful, this will be followed by stage 3, in which we will seek NHS adoption of EPICare for rollout to all EIP services in England.

CONCLUSIONS

By establishing a multistakeholder network and engaging them in an iterative co-design process, we have identified essential and desirable elements of the EPICare registry and CDSS; proactively identified and minimized potential challenges and barriers to uptake and implementation; and addressed key questions related to informatics architecture, infrastructure, governance, and integration in diverse NHS Trusts, enabling us to proceed with the building, piloting, implementation, and evaluation of EPICare.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/50177.

Randomised controlled trial of the Community Navigator programme to reduce loneliness and depression for adults with treatment-resistant depression in secondary community mental health services: trial protocol

BACKGROUND

New treatments are needed for people with treatment-resistant depression (TRD), who do not benefit from anti-depressants and many of whom do not recover fully with psychological treatments. The Community Navigator programme was co-produced with service users and practitioners. It is a novel social intervention which aims to reduce loneliness and thus improve health outcomes for people with TRD. Participants receive up to 10 individual meetings with a Community Navigator, who helps them to map their social world and set and enact goals to enhance their social connections and reduce loneliness. Participants may also access group meet-ups with others in the programme every 2 months, and may be offered modest financial support to enable activities to support social connections.

METHODS

A researcher-blind, multi-site, 1:1 randomised controlled trial with N = 306 participants will test the effectiveness of the Community Navigator programme for people with TRD in secondary community mental health teams (CMHTs). Our primary hypothesis is that people who are offered the Community Navigator programme as an addition to usual CMHT care will be less depressed, assessed using the PHQ-9 self-report measure, at 8-month, end-of-treatment follow-up, compared to a control group receiving usual CMHT care and a booklet with information about local social groups and activities. We will follow participants up at end-of-treatment and at 14 months, 6 months after end-of-treatment follow-up. Secondary outcomes include the following: loneliness, anxiety, personal recovery, self-efficacy, social network, social identities. We will collect data about health-related quality of life and service use to investigate the cost-effectiveness of the Community Navigator programme.

DISCUSSION

This trial will provide definitive evidence about the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Community Navigator programme and whether it can be recommended for use in practice. The trial is due to finish in August 2025.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Prospectively registered on 8th July 2022 at: ISRCTN13205972.

Five-year illness trajectories across racial groups in the UK following a first episode psychosis

PURPOSE

Psychosis disproportionally affects ethnic minority groups in high-income countries, yet evidence of disparities in outcomes following intensive early intervention service (EIS) for First Episode Psychosis (FEP) is less conclusive. We investigated 5-year clinical and social outcomes of young people with FEP from different racial groups following EIS care.

METHOD

Data were analysed from the UK-wide NIHR SUPEREDEN study. The sample at baseline (n = 978) included White (n = 750), Black (n = 71), and Asian (n = 157) individuals, assessed during the 3 years of EIS, and up to 2 years post-discharge (n = 296; Black [n = 23]; Asian [n = 52] and White [n = 221]). Outcome trajectories were modelled for psychosis symptoms (positive, negative, and general), functioning, and depression, using linear mixed effect models (with random intercept and slopes), whilst controlling for social deprivation. Discharge service was also explored across racial groups, 2 years following EIS.

RESULTS

Variation in linear growth over time was accounted for by racial group status for psychosis symptoms-positive (95% CI [0.679, 1.235]), negative (95% CI [0.315, 0.783]), and general (95% CI [1.961, 3.428])-as well as for functioning (95% CI [11.212, 17.677]) and depressive symptoms (95% CI [0.261, 0.648]). Social deprivation contributed to this variance. Black individuals experienced greater levels of deprivation (p < 0.001, 95% CI [0.187, 0.624]). Finally, there was a greater likelihood for Asian (OR = 3.04; 95% CI [2.050, 4.498]) and Black individuals (OR = 2.47; 95% CI [1.354, 4.520]) to remain in secondary care by follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Findings suggest variations in long-term clinical and social outcomes following EIS across racial groups; social deprivation contributed to this variance. Black and Asian individuals appear to make less improvement in long-term recovery and are less likely to be discharged from mental health services. Replication is needed in large, complete data, to fully understand disparities and blind spots to care.