scholarly journals Understanding the role of the family physician in early psychosis intervention

BJPsych Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (6) ◽  
pp. 447-453 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly K. Anderson ◽  
Suzanne Archie ◽  
Richard G. Booth ◽  
Chiachen Cheng ◽  
Daniel Lizotte ◽  
...  

BackgroundThe family physician is key to facilitating access to psychiatric treatment for young people with first-episode psychosis, and this involvement can reduce aversive events in pathways to care. Those who seek help from primary care tend to have longer intervals to psychiatric care, and some people receive ongoing psychiatric treatment from the family physician.AimsOur objective is to understand the role of the family physician in help-seeking, recognition and ongoing management of first-episode psychosis.MethodWe will use a mixed-methods approach, incorporating health administrative data, electronic medical records (EMRs) and qualitative methodologies to study the role of the family physician at three points on the pathway to care. First, help-seeking: we will use health administrative data to examine access to a family physician and patterns of primary care use preceding the first diagnosis of psychosis; second, recognition: we will identify first-onset cases of psychosis in health administrative data, and look back at linked EMRs from primary care to define a risk profile for undetected cases; and third, management: we will examine service provision to identified patients through EMR data, including patterns of contacts, prescriptions and referrals to specialised care. We will then conduct qualitative interviews and focus groups with key stakeholders to better understand the trends observed in the quantitative data.DiscussionThese findings will provide an in-depth description of first-episode psychosis in primary care, informing strategies to build linkages between family physicians and psychiatric services to improve transitions of care during the crucial early stages of psychosis.Declaration of interestNone.

2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (12) ◽  
pp. 2091-2099 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly K. Anderson ◽  
Ross Norman ◽  
Arlene G. MacDougall ◽  
Jordan Edwards ◽  
Lena Palaniyappan ◽  
...  

AbstractBackgroundDiscrepancies between population-based estimates of the incidence of psychotic disorder and the treated incidence reported by early psychosis intervention (EPI) programs suggest additional cases may be receiving services elsewhere in the health system. Our objective was to estimate the incidence of non-affective psychotic disorder in the catchment area of an EPI program, and compare this to EPI-treated incidence estimates.MethodsWe constructed a retrospective cohort (1997–2015) of incident cases of non-affective psychosis aged 16–50 years in an EPI program catchment using population-based linked health administrative data. Cases were identified by either one hospitalization or two outpatient physician billings within a 12-month period with a diagnosis of non-affective psychosis. We estimated the cumulative incidence and EPI-treated incidence of non-affective psychosis using denominator data from the census. We also estimated the incidence of first-episode psychosis (people who would meet the case definition for an EPI program) using a novel approach.ResultsOur case definition identified 3245 cases of incident non-affective psychosis over the 17-year period. We estimate that the incidence of first-episode non-affective psychosis in the program catchment area is 33.3 per 100 000 per year (95% CI 31.4–35.1), which is more than twice as high as the EPI-treated incidence of 18.8 per 100 000 per year (95% CI 17.4–20.3).ConclusionsCase ascertainment strategies limited to specialized psychiatric services may substantially underestimate the incidence of non-affective psychotic disorders, relative to population-based estimates. Accurate information on the epidemiology of first-episode psychosis will enable us to more effectively resource EPI services and evaluate their coverage.


Author(s):  
Greeshma Mohan ◽  
R. Padmavati ◽  
R. Thara

In the Indian secular, pluralistic, and collectivist society, the family is the oldest and the most important institution that has survived through the ages. With rapid urbanization and an ever-expanding population, there is a scarcity of financial and human resources in the area of mental health. Though progressively decreasing in size, families continue to provide a valuable support system, which can be helpful in the management of various stressful situations. Yet, very often this resource is not adequately and appropriately utilized. This chapter describes the role of family involvement in first-episode psychosis, drawing from various research projects carried out by the Schizophrenia Research Foundation (SCARF) and from other Indian centres. It deals with the identification of prodromes, access to care, treatment adherence and follow-up, and stigma.


2018 ◽  
Vol 63 (6) ◽  
pp. 395-403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly K. Anderson ◽  
Ross Norman ◽  
Arlene G. MacDougall ◽  
Jordan Edwards ◽  
Lena Palaniyappan ◽  
...  

Objective: There is a dearth of information on people with first-episode psychosis who do not access specialized early psychosis intervention (EPI) services. We sought to estimate the proportion of incident cases of nonaffective psychosis that do not access these services and to examine factors associated with EPI admission. Methods: Using health administrative data, we constructed a retrospective cohort of incident cases of nonaffective psychosis in the catchment area of the Prevention and Early Intervention Program for Psychoses (PEPP) in London, Ontario, between 1997 and 2013. This cohort was linked to primary data from PEPP to identify EPI users. We used multivariate logistic regression to model sociodemographic and service factors associated with EPI admission. Results: Over 50% of suspected cases of nonaffective psychosis did not have contact with EPI services for screening or admission. EPI users were significantly younger, more likely to be male (odds ratio [OR] 1.58; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.24 to 2.01), and less likely to live in areas of socioeconomic deprivation (OR 0.51; 95% CI 0.36 to 0.73). EPI users also had higher odds of psychiatrist involvement at the index diagnosis (OR 7.35; 95% CI 5.43 to 10.00), had lower odds of receiving the index diagnosis in an outpatient setting (OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.38 to 0.65), and had lower odds of prior alcohol-related (OR 0.42; 95% CI 0.28 to 0.63) and substance-related (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.50 to 0.93) disorders. Conclusions: We need a greater consideration of patients with first-episode psychosis who are not accessing EPI services. Our findings suggest that this group is sizable, and there may be sociodemographic and clinical disparities in access. Nonpsychiatric health professionals could be targeted with interventions aimed at increasing detection and referral rates.


2019 ◽  
Vol 209 ◽  
pp. 64-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn E. Lewandowski ◽  
Fei Du ◽  
Xiaoying Fan ◽  
Xi Chen ◽  
Polly Huynh ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 206 ◽  
pp. 251-256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edwin Ho Ming Lee ◽  
Christy Lai Ming Hui ◽  
Karen Pui Kei Chan ◽  
Pik Ying Chan ◽  
Eunice Yeuk Lai Law ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 30 (12) ◽  
pp. 1899-1900
Author(s):  
Tuula Saarela ◽  
Monica Johansson ◽  
Ullamarja Louhija ◽  
Björn Appelberg ◽  
Kati Juva

Schizophrenia guidelines list family interventions as an efficient means in reducing relapses. Interventions aim to help families cope with their relative's problems more effectively, provide support and education, and reduce levels of distress and improve the family communication (see deHaanet al., 2002).


2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. S303-S303 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly Anderson ◽  
Suzanne Archie ◽  
Richard Booth ◽  
Chiachen Cheng ◽  
Arlene MacDougall ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document