The population of persons of color (POC) are increasing in the United States. Unfortunately, POC are significantly impacted by serious mental illness; psychosis represents a mental health disparity among POC. Fortunately, first episode coordinated specialty care (CSC) is an effective treatment for individuals who are in the early phases of a psychotic disorder. This systematic review of the literature examined POC inclusion rates in randomized controlled trials (RCT) examining First Episode Psychosis (FEP) programs. Our review yielded seven articles that met inclusion criteria. Our findings were mixed-researchers conducting RCTs on FEP programs did an excellent job including African American participants suggesting that findings from RCTs on FEP programs may generalize to African American participants. Regarding Latines, they were broadly underrepresented in RCTs on FEP CSC. Based on the data, we cannot definitively conclude to what extent findings from RCTs on FEP CSC generalize to Latines although results from studies that included a reasonable number of Latines offer promising results. Asians were overrepresented in three of the seven studies included in this review; thus it seems that the findings from RCTs on FEP CSC generalize to the Asian population in the United States.
BACKGROUND: Psychosis is an illness characterised by the presence of hallucinations and delusions that can cause distress or a marked change in an individual's behaviour (e.g. social withdrawal, flat or blunted effect). A first episode of psychosis (FEP) is the first time someone experiences these symptoms that can occur at any age, but the condition is most common in late adolescence and early adulthood. This review is concerned with first episode psychosis (FEP) and the early stages of a psychosis, referred to throughout this review as 'recent-onset psychosis.' Specialised early intervention (SEI) teams are community mental health teams that specifically treat people who are experiencing, or have experienced a recent-onset psychosis. The purpose of SEI teams is to intensively treat people with psychosis early in the course of the illness with the goal of increasing the likelihood of recovery and reducing the need for longer-term mental health treatment. SEI teams provide a range of treatments including medication, psychotherapy, psychoeducation, and occupational, educational and employment support, augmented by assertive contact with the service user and small caseloads. Treatment is time limited, usually offered for two to three years, after which service users are either discharged to primary care or transferred to a standard adult community mental health team. A previous Cochrane Review of SEI found preliminary evidence that SEI may be superior to standard community mental health care (described as 'treatment as usual (TAU)' in this review) but these recommendations were based on data from only one trial. This review updates the evidence for the use of SEI services.
OBJECTIVES: To compare specialised early intervention (SEI) teams to treatment as usual (TAU) for people with recent-onset psychosis.
SEARCH METHODS: On 3 October 2018 and 22 October 2019, we searched Cochrane Schizophrenia's study-based register of trials, including registries of clinical trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SEI with TAU for people with recent-onset psychosis. We entered trials meeting these criteria and reporting useable data as included studies.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently inspected citations, selected studies, extracted data and appraised study quality. For binary outcomes we calculated the risk ratios (RRs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). For continuous outcomes we calculated the mean difference (MD) and their 95% CIs, or if assessment measures differed for the same construct, we calculated the standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% CIs. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and created a 'Summary of findings' table using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS: We included three RCTs and one cluster-RCT with a total of 1145 participants. The mean age in the trials was between 23.1 years (RAISE) and 26.6 years (OPUS). The included participants were 405 females (35.4%) and 740 males (64.6%). All trials took place in community mental healthcare settings. Two trials reported on recovery from psychosis at the end of treatment, with evidence that SEI team care may result in more participants in recovery than TAU at the end of treatment (73% versus 52%; RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.97; 2 studies, 194 participants; low-certainty evidence). Three trials provided data on disengagement from services at the end of treatment, with fewer participants probably being disengaged from mental health services in SEI (8%) in comparison to TAU (15%) (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.79; 3 studies, 630 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was low-certainty evidence that SEI may result in fewer admissions to psychiatric hospital than TAU at the end of treatment (52% versus 57%; RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.00; 4 studies, 1145 participants) and low-certainty evidence that SEI may result in fewer psychiatric hospital days (MD -27.00 days, 95% CI -53.68 to -0.32; 1 study, 547 participants). Two trials reported on general psychotic symptoms at the end of treatment, with no evidence of a difference between SEI and TAU, although this evidence is very uncertain (SMD -0.41, 95% CI -4.58 to 3.75; 2 studies, 304 participants; very low-certainty evidence). A different pattern was observed in assessment of general functioning with an end of trial difference that may favour SEI (SMD 0.37, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.66; 2 studies, 467 participants; low-certainty evidence). It was uncertain whether the use of SEI resulted in fewer deaths due to all-cause mortality at end of treatment (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.20; 3 studies, 741 participants; low-certainty evidence). There was low risk of bias for random sequence generation and allocation concealment in three of the four included trials; the remaining trial had unclear risk of bias. Due to the nature of the intervention, we considered all trials at high risk of bias for blinding of participants and personnel. Two trials had low risk of bias and two trials had high risk of bias for blinding of outcomes assessments. Three trials had low risk of bias for incomplete outcome data, while one trial had high risk of bias. Two trials had low risk of bias, one trial had high risk of bias, and one had unclear risk of bias for selective reporting.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence that SEI may provide benefits to service users during treatment compared to TAU. These benefits probably include fewer disengagements from mental health services (moderate-certainty evidence), and may include small reductions in psychiatric hospitalisation (low-certainty evidence), and a small increase in global functioning (low-certainty evidence) and increased service satisfaction (moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence regarding the effect of SEI over TAU after treatment has ended is uncertain. Further evidence investigating the longer-term outcomes of SEI is needed. Furthermore, all the eligible trials included in this review were conducted in high-income countries, and it is unclear whether these findings would translate to low- and middle-income countries, where both the intervention and the comparison conditions may be different.
AIM: Attenuated psychotic symptoms (APSs) have been the primary emphasis in youth at clinical high risk (CHR) for psychosis for assessing symptomology and determining subsequent transition to a psychotic disorder. Previous reviews primarily focused on the efficacy of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) on APS; however, a comprehensive assessment of other interventions to date is lacking. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of all intervention studies examining APS in CHR youth.
METHOD: The authors searched Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Medline and EBM from inception to May 2017. Studies were selected if they included any intervention that reported follow-up APS in youth at CHR. Interventions were evaluated and stratified by time using both pairwise and network meta-analyses (NMAs). Due to the differences in APS scales, effect sizes were calculated as Hedges g and reported as the standardized mean difference (SMD).
RESULTS: Forty-one studies met our inclusion criteria. In pairwise meta-analyses, CBT was associated with a significant reduction in APS compared to controls at 18- to 24-month follow-up (SMD, -0.22; 95% CI, -0.43 to -0.01; I2 =0%; P = .04, 3 studies, N = 356). In the NMA, integrated psychological therapy, CBT, supportive therapy, family therapy, needs-based interventions, omega-3, risperidone plus CBT and olanzapine were not significantly more effective at reducing APS at 6 and 12 months relative to any other intervention.
CONCLUSIONS: CBT was more effective at reducing APS at long-term follow-up compared to controls. No interventions were significantly more effective at reducing APS compared to all other interventions in the NMA.
Despite convincing evidence of short-term symptom control and functional recovery of patients with psychosis after receiving early intervention (EI) services, little is known about the long-term outcomes of EI for these patients. This review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of EI services in improving long-term outcomes of patients with psychosis. A systematic literature search was conducted on PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, Medline, CINAHL, BIOSIS, and EMBASE electronic databases to identify studies that evaluated long-term outcomes of patients with psychosis measured 5 years or beyond after entering the EI service. Of 13,005 articles returned from the search, 14 eligible articles reporting study cohorts from nine EI services in seven countries and regions were identified. Data on study design, patient characteristics, intervention components, and outcomes were extracted and reviewed. Only a few studies reported better longitudinal outcomes for negative symptoms, mortality, employment, and hospitalization in patients received EI services. However, results from cross-sectional measurements provided little evidence for long-term impacts of EI services on clinical and functional outcomes. A dilution effect of benefits over time was also demonstrated in several studies. This review highlights the gap in current EI service provision and suggests possible future directions for service improvement and further research.
OBJECTIVE: Youth at clinical high risk (CHR) for psychosis often demonstrate significant negative symptoms, which have been reported to be predictive of conversion to psychosis and a reduced quality of life but treatment options for negative symptoms remain inadequate. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of all intervention studies examining negative symptom outcomes in youth at CHR for psychosis.
METHOD: The authors searched PsycINFO, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and EBM from inception to December 2016. Studies were selected if they included any intervention that reported follow-up negative symptoms in youth at CHR for psychosis. Treatment comparisons were evaluated using both pairwise and network meta-analyses. Due to the differences in negative symptom scales the effect sizes were reported as the standardized mean difference (SMD).
RESULTS: Of 3027 citations, 32 studies met our inclusion criteria, including a total of 2463 CHR participants. N-methyl-D-aspartate-receptor (NMDAR) modulators trended toward a significant reduction in negative symptoms compared to placebo (SMD = -0.54; 95% CI = -1.09 to 0.02; I2 = 0%, P = .06). In respective order of descending effectiveness as per the treatment hierarchy, NMDAR modulators were more effective than family therapy, need-based interventions, risperidone, amisulpride, cognitive behavioral therapy, omega-3, olanzapine, supportive therapy, and integrated psychological interventions.
CONCLUSIONS: Although this review demonstrated small-large effect sizes between interventions and a reduction in negative symptoms many relevant studies had small samples and the majority was not designed to target negative symptoms, thus reducing their clinical importance with respect to negative symptoms.
AIMS: To review the evidence on the effect of brief interventions (BIs) for alcohol among adults with risky alcohol consumption and comorbid mental health conditions. METHODS: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before May 2016 was undertaken and reported according to PRISMA guidelines. The findings were combined in a narrative synthesis. The risk of bias was assessed for included trials. RESULTS: Seventeen RCTs were included in the review and narrative synthesis: 11 in common mental health problems, and 6 in severe mental illness. There was considerable heterogeneity in study populations, BI delivery mode and intensity, outcome measures and risk of bias. Where BI was compared with a minimally active control, BI was associated with a significant reduction in alcohol consumption in four out of nine RCTs in common mental disorders and two out of five RCTs in severe mental illness. Where BI was compared with active comparator groups (such as motivational interviewing or cognitive behavioural therapy), findings were also mixed. Differences in the findings may be partly due to differences in study design, such as the intensity of BI and possibly the risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the evidence is mixed regarding the effects of alcohol BI in participants with comorbid mental health conditions. Future well-designed research is required to answer this question more definitively. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
Importance: The value of early intervention in psychosis and allocation of public resources has long been debated because outcomes in people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders have remained suboptimal. OBJECTIVE: To compare early intervention services (EIS) with treatment as usual (TAU) for early-phase psychosis. DATA SOURCES: Systematic literature search of PubMed, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov without language restrictions through June 6, 2017. Study selection: Randomized trials comparing EIS vs TAU in first-episode psychosis or early-phase schizophrenia spectrum disorders. Data extraction and synthesis: This systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Three independent investigators extracted data for a random-effects meta-analysis and prespecified subgroup and meta-regression analyses. Main outcomes and measures: The coprimary outcomes were all-cause treatment discontinuation and at least 1 psychiatric hospitalization during the treatment period. RESULTS: Across 10 randomized clinical trials (mean [SD] trial duration, 16.2 [7.4] months; range, 9-24 months) among 2176 patients (mean [SD] age, 27.5 [4.6] years; 1355 [62.3%] male), EIS was associated with better outcomes than TAU at the end of treatment for all 13 meta-analyzable outcomes. These outcomes included the following: all-cause treatment discontinuation (risk ratio [RR], 0.70; 95%CI, 0.61-0.80; <i>P</i> < .001), at least 1 psychiatric hospitalization (RR, 0.74; 95%CI, 0.61-0.90; <i>P</i> = .003), involvement in school or work (RR, 1.13; 95%CI, 1.03-1.24; <i>P</i> = .01), total symptom severity (standardized mean difference [SMD], −0.32; 95%CI, −0.47 to −0.17; <i>P</i> < .001), positive symptom severity (SMD, −0.22; 95%CI, −0.32 to −0.11; <i>P</i> < .001), and negative symptom severity (SMD, −0.28; 95%CI, −0.42 to −0.14;<i> P</i> < .001). Superiority of EIS regarding all outcomes was evident at 6, 9 to 12, and 18 to 24 months of treatment (except for general symptom severity and depressive symptom severity at 18-24 months). Conclusions and relevance: In early-phase psychosis, EIS are superior to TAU across all meta-analyzable outcomes. These results support the need for funding and use of EIS in patients with early-phase psychosis. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
OBJETIVOS: Esta revisión sistemática tuvo como objetivo sintetizar la evidencia sobre la efectividad de la entrevista motivacional (IM), impartida en modos distintos del asesoramiento individual cara a cara, en la prevención y el tratamiento de los comportamientos relacionados con el abuso de sustancias. MÉTODOS: Se realizaron búsquedas en ensayos clínicos aleatorios (ECA) que evaluaron la efectividad de los modos alternativos de IM (con excepción del asesoramiento individual cara a cara) en la prevención de la enfermedad de Parkinson Y el tratamiento del abuso de sustancias. Los estudios elegibles fueron calificados en calidad metodológica y sus hallazgos fueron sintetizados cualitativamente. RESULTADOS: Un total de 25 artículos (en 22 ECA) fueron elegibles para esta revisión. Más allá del asesoramiento cara a cara, el teléfono fue el medio más utilizado para la administración del IM (11 estudios), seguido por la comunicación por Internet (4 estudios) y el servicio de mensajes cortos (SMS) (2 estudios). Mail fue incorporado como suplemento en uno de los estudios para el teléfono MI. En contraste con el asesoramiento individual de uno a uno, el grupo MI fue adoptado en 5 estudios. La efectividad del MI telefónico en el tratamiento del abuso de sustancias fue apoyada por todos los ECA publicados que localizamos. MI basado en Internet fue eficaz en la prevención y el tratamiento del alcoholismo, pero su resultado parecía ser inconsistente para el abandono del hábito de fumar y pobre para la abstinencia de drogas ilícitas. El MI basado en SMS parecía ser útil para controlar el tabaco y el consumo de alcohol. El Grupo MI se intentó por dejar de fumar alcohol y drogas, con resultados mixtos sobre sus resultados. CONCLUSIONES: En conjunto, los estudios revisados indican que el MI telefónico es un modo prometedor de intervención en el tratamiento y prevención del abuso de sustancias. La eficacia de otros modos alternativos (SMS basado en SMS, MI basado en Internet y grupo MI) sigue siendo poco concluyente dado los hallazgos polémicos y un número limitado de estudios. Mediante la síntesis de la evidencia actualmente disponible, esta revisión sistemática sugirió que el MI telefónico podría ser considerado como una alternativa al MI cara a cara para tratar y prevenir el abuso de sustancias. Se necesitan más investigaciones para investigar la efectividad del MI basado en SMS, Internet MI, grupo MI y otros modos alternativos. Los estudios con rigor metodológico e incorporación de medidas de fidelidad MI tienen un gran potencial para avanzar en la comprensión en este campo.
OBJECTIVES: This systematic review (SR) provides evidence on pharmacological and psychosocial treatments for schizophrenia.
DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE®, the Cochrane Library databases, PsycINFO®, and included studies through February 2017.
STUDY SELECTION: We included studies comparing second-generation antipsychotics (SGA) with each other or with a first-generation antipsychotic (FGA) and studies comparing psychosocial interventions with usual care in adults with schizophrenia.
DATA EXTRACTION: We extracted study design, year, setting, country, sample size, eligibility criteria, population, clinical and intervention characteristics, results, and funding source.
RESULTS: We included 1 SR of 138 trials (N=47,189) and 24 trials (N=6,672) for SGAs versus SGAs, 1 SR of 111 trials (N=118,503) and 5 trials (N=1,055) for FGAs versus SGAs, and 13 SRs of 271 trials (N=25,050) and 27 trials (n=6,404) for psychosocial interventions. Trials were mostly fair quality and strength of evidence was low or moderate. For drug therapy, the majority of the head-to-head evidence was on older SGAs, with sparse data on SGAs approved in the last 10 years (asenapine, lurasidone, iloperidone, cariprazine, brexpiprazole) and recent long-acting injection (LAI) formulations of aripiprazole and paliperidone. Older SGAs were similar in measures of function, quality of life, mortality, and overall adverse events, except that risperidone LAI had better social function than quetiapine. Core illness symptoms were improved more with olanzapine and risperidone than asenapine, quetiapine, and ziprasidone, and more with paliperidone than lurasidone and iloperidone; all were superior to placebo. Risperidone LAI and olanzapine had less withdrawal due to adverse events. Compared with olanzapine and risperidone, haloperidol, the most studied FGA, had similar improvement in core illness symptoms, negative symptoms, symptom response, and remission but greater incidence of adverse event outcomes. In comparison with usual care, most psychosocial interventions reviewed were more effective in improving intervention-targeted outcomes, including core illness symptoms. Various functional outcomes were improved more with assertive community treatment, cognitive behavioral therapy, family interventions, psychoeducation, social skills training, supported employment, and early interventions for first episode psychosis (FEP) than with usual care. Quality of life was improved more with cognitive behavioral therapy and early interventions for FEP than usual care. Relapse was reduced with family interventions, psychoeducation, illness self-management, family interventions, and early interventions for FEP.
CONCLUSIONS: Most comparative evidence on pharmacotherapy relates to the older drugs, with clozapine, olanzapine, and risperidone superior on more outcomes than other SGAs. Older SGAs were similar to haloperidol on benefit outcomes but had fewer adverse event outcomes. Most psychosocial interventions improved functional outcomes, quality of life, and core illness symptoms, and several reduced relapse compared with usual care.
The population of persons of color (POC) are increasing in the United States. Unfortunately, POC are significantly impacted by serious mental illness; psychosis represents a mental health disparity among POC. Fortunately, first episode coordinated specialty care (CSC) is an effective treatment for individuals who are in the early phases of a psychotic disorder. This systematic review of the literature examined POC inclusion rates in randomized controlled trials (RCT) examining First Episode Psychosis (FEP) programs. Our review yielded seven articles that met inclusion criteria. Our findings were mixed-researchers conducting RCTs on FEP programs did an excellent job including African American participants suggesting that findings from RCTs on FEP programs may generalize to African American participants. Regarding Latines, they were broadly underrepresented in RCTs on FEP CSC. Based on the data, we cannot definitively conclude to what extent findings from RCTs on FEP CSC generalize to Latines although results from studies that included a reasonable number of Latines offer promising results. Asians were overrepresented in three of the seven studies included in this review; thus it seems that the findings from RCTs on FEP CSC generalize to the Asian population in the United States.
