BackgroundThis trial evaluated the feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness of a structured approach to the management of schizophrenia in general practice.MethodAll patients with non-affective psychosis (mainly schizophrenia) in four inner-city general practices were recruited. A check-list and a set of outcome measures were used by the general practitioner and the practice nurses. Information on attendances at the general practice and psychiatric out-patient departments was also collected.ResultsTwo practices took part in the intervention and two served as control practices. Sixty-seven patients with non-affective psychosis were identified. Thirty-three (81%) of the 41 patients in the two intervention practices attended the initial assessment by the doctor and nurse, but only 13 (32%) attended the first review assessment. The attendance for the second review, after six months, was six out of 15 (40%) in one practice, but rose to 16 out of 18 (89%) in the other practice. Significant improvements were recorded in the intervention group on the Global Assessment Scale (GAS) and the Behaviour, Speech and Other Syndromes (BSO) subscore of the Present State Examination (PSE). The absolute risk reduction and relative risk reduction as a result of the intervention as measured by the GAS scores, was 29% (95% CI 4% to 54%) and 36% (95% CI 5% to 66%), respectively, and in the case of the BSO subscores of the PSE, this was 23% (95% CI – 1.8% to 47.2%) and 28% (95% CI – 2.2% to 57%), respectively. For one patient to show an improvement in GAS and BSO scores 3.5 patients (95% CI 1.85 to 25) and 4.3 patients (95% CI – 55 to 2.1), respectively, would need to receive the intervention. There was a significant increase in consultation rates for patients in the intervention practices.ConclusionsHealth surveillance of patients with non-affective psychosis is possible in general practice.
Communicating risk using absolute risk reduction or prolongation of life formats: cluster-randomised trial in general practice
