Browsing by Author "Fusar-Poli, Paolo (10044017500)"

Purpose: Although first-episode psychosis (FEP) in youth, particularly early-onset schizophrenia (EOS), is managed similarly to adult-onset schizophrenia, few antipsychotics are approved for people aged 13–18 years. We aimed to explore areas of uncertainty in EOS management and provide evidence-based recommendations to mental health specialists. We used the Delphi methodology to gain knowledge in areas lacking evidence-based strategies. This standardized methodology consists of the development of a questionnaire by content experts, which is then submitted to a broader panel of professionals (panelists) to survey their level of agreement on the topics proposed. Materials and Methods: The developed questionnaire covered patient management from diagnosis to maintenance treatment and was administered to a broader panel of specialists across Europe. Based on an analysis of responses received in this first round, the items that needed further insight were submitted to the panel for a second round and then reanalysed. Results: An initial set of 90 items was developed; in round I, consensus was reached for 83/90 items (92%), while it was reached for 7/11 (64%) of the items sent out for rerating in round II. Feedback for rounds I and II was obtained from 54/92 and 48/54 approached experts, respectively. There was broad agreement on diagnostic standards, multimodal approaches and focus on adverse events, but uncertainty in terms of pharmacological strategies (including clozapine) in case of failure and antipsychotic dosing in younger patients. Conclusion: Despite knowledge about diagnostic clues and integrated management of EOS, this study highlights the lack of standardization in treating EOS, with safety arguments having a major role in the decision-making process. Targeted clinical trials and systematic dissemination across Europe of current scientific evidence on the value of early intervention services is hoped to contribute to standardized and improved quality care for patients with early-phase psychosis and schizophrenia. © 2022 Correll et al.

Purpose: Although first-episode psychosis (FEP) in youth, particularly early-onset schizophrenia (EOS), is managed similarly to adult-onset schizophrenia, few antipsychotics are approved for people aged 13–18 years. We aimed to explore areas of uncertainty in EOS management and provide evidence-based recommendations to mental health specialists. We used the Delphi methodology to gain knowledge in areas lacking evidence-based strategies. This standardized methodology consists of the development of a questionnaire by content experts, which is then submitted to a broader panel of professionals (panelists) to survey their level of agreement on the topics proposed. Materials and Methods: The developed questionnaire covered patient management from diagnosis to maintenance treatment and was administered to a broader panel of specialists across Europe. Based on an analysis of responses received in this first round, the items that needed further insight were submitted to the panel for a second round and then reanalysed. Results: An initial set of 90 items was developed; in round I, consensus was reached for 83/90 items (92%), while it was reached for 7/11 (64%) of the items sent out for rerating in round II. Feedback for rounds I and II was obtained from 54/92 and 48/54 approached experts, respectively. There was broad agreement on diagnostic standards, multimodal approaches and focus on adverse events, but uncertainty in terms of pharmacological strategies (including clozapine) in case of failure and antipsychotic dosing in younger patients. Conclusion: Despite knowledge about diagnostic clues and integrated management of EOS, this study highlights the lack of standardization in treating EOS, with safety arguments having a major role in the decision-making process. Targeted clinical trials and systematic dissemination across Europe of current scientific evidence on the value of early intervention services is hoped to contribute to standardized and improved quality care for patients with early-phase psychosis and schizophrenia. © 2022 Correll et al.

Background: Clinical research into the Clinical High Risk state for Psychosis (CHR-P) has allowed primary indicated prevention in psychiatry to improve outcomes of psychotic disorders. The strategic component of this approach is the implementation of clinical services to detect and take care of CHR-P individuals, which are recommended by several guidelines. The actual level of implementation of CHR-P services worldwide is not completely clear. Aim: To assess the global geographical distribution, core characteristics relating to the level of implementation of CHR-P services; to overview of the main barriers that limit their implementation at scale. Methods: CHR-P services worldwide were invited to complete an online survey. The survey addressed the geographical distribution, general implementation characteristics and implementation barriers. Results: The survey was completed by 47 CHR-P services offering care to 22 248 CHR-P individuals: Western Europe (51.1%), North America (17.0%), East Asia (17.0%), Australia (6.4%), South America (6.4%) and Africa (2.1%). Their implementation characteristics included heterogeneous clinical settings, assessment instruments and length of care offered. Most CHR-P patients were recruited through mental or physical health services. Preventive interventions included clinical monitoring and crisis management (80.1%), supportive therapy (70.2%) or structured psychotherapy (61.7%), in combination with pharmacological treatment (in 74.5%). Core implementation barriers were staffing and financial constraints, and the recruitment of CHR-P individuals. The dynamic map of CHR-P services has been implemented on the IEPA website: https://iepa.org.au/list-a-service/. Conclusions: Worldwide primary indicated prevention of psychosis in CHR-P individuals is possible, but the implementation of CHR-P services is heterogeneous and constrained by pragmatic challenges. © 2020 John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd

Background: Clinical research into the Clinical High Risk state for Psychosis (CHR-P) has allowed primary indicated prevention in psychiatry to improve outcomes of psychotic disorders. The strategic component of this approach is the implementation of clinical services to detect and take care of CHR-P individuals, which are recommended by several guidelines. The actual level of implementation of CHR-P services worldwide is not completely clear. Aim: To assess the global geographical distribution, core characteristics relating to the level of implementation of CHR-P services; to overview of the main barriers that limit their implementation at scale. Methods: CHR-P services worldwide were invited to complete an online survey. The survey addressed the geographical distribution, general implementation characteristics and implementation barriers. Results: The survey was completed by 47 CHR-P services offering care to 22 248 CHR-P individuals: Western Europe (51.1%), North America (17.0%), East Asia (17.0%), Australia (6.4%), South America (6.4%) and Africa (2.1%). Their implementation characteristics included heterogeneous clinical settings, assessment instruments and length of care offered. Most CHR-P patients were recruited through mental or physical health services. Preventive interventions included clinical monitoring and crisis management (80.1%), supportive therapy (70.2%) or structured psychotherapy (61.7%), in combination with pharmacological treatment (in 74.5%). Core implementation barriers were staffing and financial constraints, and the recruitment of CHR-P individuals. The dynamic map of CHR-P services has been implemented on the IEPA website: https://iepa.org.au/list-a-service/. Conclusions: Worldwide primary indicated prevention of psychosis in CHR-P individuals is possible, but the implementation of CHR-P services is heterogeneous and constrained by pragmatic challenges. © 2020 John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd