Working alliance between patients with a first-episode psychosis and their case manager is regarded as a key element in specialized early intervention services. The impact of this patient-case manager dyad on functional and clinical outcome is unknown. We aimed to investigate if a strong working alliance was associated with fewer clinical symptoms and better social functioning.
In a cross-sectional design, patients with first-episode schizophrenia spectrum disorders (ICD-10, F20-29) were included after 18 months of treatment (N = 400). Baseline data were collected between June 2009 and December 2011. Symptoms were assessed using Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms (SAPS), Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms (SANS), Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF), Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia (BACS), Working Alliance Inventory (WAI), and General Self-Efficacy (GSE). Linear regression analyses were adjusted for age, sex, cognition, and self-efficacy.
Results revealed significant associations between working alliance and fewer negative (? = -0.12; 95% CI, -0.19 to -0.04) and disorganized symptoms (? = -0.06; 95% CI, -0.11 to -0.01), and between working alliance and better social functioning (? = 1.45; 95% CI, 0.55 to 2.36). General self-efficacy mediated the effect of working alliance, explaining 14%-18% of the variance in associated outcomes. Global level of cognitive functioning, compliance, and self-efficacy influenced clinical and functional outcome more strongly than working alliance.
Better working alliance was weakly associated with fewer negative and disorganized symptoms and better social functioning. A strong working alliance may be a prerequisite for adherence to the specialized early intervention services treatment, providing the basis for positive treatment outcome.
Information about the cost-effectiveness of early intervention programmes for first-episode psychosis is limited.
To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of an intensive early-intervention programme (called OPUS) (trial registration NCT00157313) consisting of enriched assertive community treatment, psychoeducational family treatment and social skills training for individuals with first-episode psychosis compared with standard treatment.
An incremental cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomised controlled trial, adopting a public sector perspective was undertaken.
The mean total costs of OPUS over 5 years (€123,683, s.e. = 8970) were not significantly different from that of standard treatment (€148,751, s.e. = 13073). At 2-year follow-up the mean Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) score in the OPUS group (55.16, s.d. = 15.15) was significantly higher than in standard treatment group (51.13, s.d. = 15.92). However, the mean GAF did not differ significantly between the groups at 5-year follow-up (55.35 (s.d. = 18.28) and 54.16 (s.d. = 18.41), respectively). Cost-effectiveness planes based on non-parametric bootstrapping showed that OPUS was less costly and more effective in 70% of the replications. For a willingness-to-pay up to €50,000 the probability that OPUS was cost-effective was more than 80%.
The incremental cost-effectiveness analysis showed that there was a high probability of OPUS being cost-effective compared with standard treatment.
The Danish OPUS I trial randomized 547 patients with first-episode psychosis to a two-year early-specialised assertive treatment programme (OPUS) versus standard treatment. The two years OPUS treatment had significant positive effects on psychotic and negative symptoms, secondary substance abuse, treatment adherence, lower dosage of antipsychotic medication, and a higher treatment satisfaction. However, three years after end of the OPUS treatment, the positive clinical effects were not sustained, except that OPUS-treated patients were significantly less likely to be institutionalised compared with standard-treated patients. The major objective of the OPUS II trial is to evaluate the effects of five years of OPUS treatment versus two years of OPUS treatment.
The OPUS II trial is designed as a randomized, open label, parallel group trial with blinded outcome assessment. Based on our sample size estimation, 400 patients treated in OPUS for two years will be randomized to further three years of OPUS treatment versus standard treatment. The specialized assertive OPUS treatment consists of three core elements: assertive community treatment, psycho-educational family treatment, and social skills training.
It has been hypothesized that there is a critical period from onset up to five years, which represents a window of opportunity where a long-term course can be influenced. Extending the specialized assertive OPUS treatment up to five years may allow the beneficial effects to continue beyond the high-risk period, through consolidation of improved social and functional outcome.
The early phases of psychosis have been hypothesized to constitute a critical period, a window of opportunity. At the same time, the early phases of psychosis are associated with increased risk of unwanted outcome, such as suicidal behaviour and social isolation. This was the background for the emergence of early intervention services, and in Denmark, the OPUS trial was initiated as part of that process.
Modified assertive community treatment, together with family involvement and social skills training, constituted the core elements in the original programme. A total of 547 patients with first-episode psychosis were included in the trial.
To summarize briefly the results of the OPUS trial: the OPUS treatment was superior to standard treatment in reducing psychotic and negative symptoms and substance abuse, in increasing user satisfaction and adherence to treatment, and in reducing use of bed days and days in supported housing. Moreover, relatives included in the OPUS treatment were less strained and had a higher level of knowledge about schizophrenia and higher user satisfaction.
The OPUS treatment was implemented throughout Denmark. Training courses were developed and manuals and books were published. Regional health authorities had access to national grants for implementing early intervention services; as a result, OPUS teams were disseminated throughout the country. The content of the treatment is now further developed, and new elements are being tried out - such as individual placement and support, lifestyle changes, cognitive remediation, specialized treatment for substance abuse and different kinds of user involvement.
This paper aims to investigate the predictors of good outcome after first-episode non-affective psychosis and the clinical and social trajectories of those that recover.
A cohort of 255 patients with first-episode non-affective psychosis was interviewed 5 years after first diagnosis and treatment. Recovery was defined as working or studying, having a GAF-function score of 60 or above, having remission of negative and psychotic symptoms, and not living in a supported housing facility or being hospitalized during the last 2 years before the five-year follow-up interview.
A total of 40 (15.7%) were found to be recovered, and 76 (29.8%) had a job or were studying after 5 years. Of those working, as many as 20 still had psychotic symptoms. Also notable is that out of the 40 recovered, less than half were recovered after 2 years. Recovery after 5 years was predicted by female sex (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.0-5.8), higher age (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.83-0.99), pre-morbid social adaptation (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.56-0.93), growing up with both parents (OR 2.6, 95% CI 1.0-6.8) and low level of negative symptoms (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.77) at baseline.
Our findings suggest that a stable social life with normal social functioning has a predictive value for good outcome. These measures might be influenced by negative symptoms, but in the multivariate analysis with negative symptoms included they have an independent effect. Also our findings suggest that, after first-episode psychosis, some patients can still experience psychotic symptoms, but have a job and a fairly stable life.
BACKGROUND: From an 'objective' perspective, treatment of first-episode psychosis has improved in many ways with the development of specialised early and intensive team-based treatment like e.g. the 'OPUS' treatment. However, the patients' perspective is also important and was investigated in the 'OPUS' study by analysing data concerning quality of life. AIM: We aimed to investigate the 'quality of life from patients' perspective' among a cohort of young adults with a first-episode psychosis at the time of treatment initiation and after two years. Especially, we were interested in analysing if there were any significant effects on the subjective quality of life of receiving an intensive psychosocial assertive community treatment called 'OPUS' compared to standard treatment (ST). METHOD: This study is part of the Danish 'OPUS' trial, a randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing 'treatment as usual' (standard treatment, ST) with 'OPUS' treatment. The Lancashire Quality of Life Profile (LQoLP), which is a combined objective and subjective instrument, was administered at baseline and after two years of treatment, N=280. RESULTS: The intensive 'OPUS' treatment did not affect the quality of life measured by Lancashire QoLP in a significantly different way from the standard treatment (ST). There were no significant differences in quality of life between the ST group and the OPUS group concerning the 9 life domains. Quality of life correlated with psychopathology (both psychotic and negative symptoms) to a minor extent and more strongly with the affective balance and level of self-esteem.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of integrated treatment for patients with a first episode of psychotic illness. DESIGN: Randomised clinical trial. SETTING: Copenhagen Hospital Corporation and Psychiatric Hospital Aarhus, Denmark. PARTICIPANTS: 547 patients with first episode of schizophrenia spectrum disorder. INTERVENTIONS: Integrated treatment and standard treatment. The integrated treatment lasted for two years and consisted of assertive community treatment with programmes for family involvement and social skills training. Standard treatment offered contact with a community mental health centre. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Psychotic and negative symptoms (each scored from 0 to a maximum of 5) at one and two years' follow-up. RESULTS: At one year's follow-up, psychotic symptoms changed favourably to a mean of 1.09 (standard deviation 1.27) with an estimated mean difference between groups of -0.31 (95% confidence interval -0.55 to -0.07, P = 0.02) in favour of integrated treatment. Negative symptoms changed favourably with an estimated difference between groups of -0.36 (-0.54 to -0.17, P
Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark; Copenhagen University Hospital, Mental Health Centre Copenhagen, Mental Health Services in the Capital Region of Denmark, Hellerup, Denmark. Electronic address: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Children and adolescents from deprived backgrounds have high rates of psychiatric problems. Parental and social factors are crucial for children's healthy and positive development, but whether psychiatric morbidity is associated with parental social marginalisation is unknown. We aimed to analyse the association between mother's and father's history of homelessness and the offspring's risk of psychiatric disorders, including substance use disorder, during childhood and adolescence.
We did a nationwide, register-based cohort study of 1?072?882 children and adolescents aged 0-16 years, who were living or born in Denmark between Jan 1, 1999, and Dec 31, 2015. Parental homelessness was the primary exposure, data on which were obtained from the Danish Homeless Register. The Danish Civil Registration System was used to extract the population and link offspring to parental information, and the outcome, psychiatric disorders in the offspring, was obtained from the Danish Psychiatric Central Research Register and the Danish National Patient Register. We analysed the association between parental history of homelessness and risk of psychiatric disorders in offspring by survival analysis using Poisson regression and incidence rate ratios (IRRs), adjusted for year and offspring characteristics, and additionally adjusted for parental factors (age at offspring's birth and parental psychiatric disorders).
17?238 (2%) offspring had either one or two parents with a history of homelessness, and 56?330 (5%) children and adolescents were diagnosed with any psychiatric disorder during the study period. The incidence of any psychiatric disorder was 15·1 cases per 1000 person-years (95% CI 14·4-15·8) in offspring with at least one parent with a history of homelessness, compared with 6·0 per 1000 person-years (95% CI 6·0-6·1) in those whose parents had no such history (IRR 2·5 [95% CI 2·3-2·7] for mother homeless, 2·3 [2·2-2·5] for father homeless, and 2·8 [2·4-3·2] for both parents homeless, after adjustment for year and offspring characteristics). This risk remained elevated after additional adjustment for factors including parental psychiatric disorders. IRRs in offspring were increased for most specific psychiatric disorders, with the highest risk for attachment disorder when both parents had a history of homelessness (IRR 32·5 [95% CI 24·6-42·9]) and substance use disorder when only the mother had a history of homelessness (6·9 [4·9-9·7]). In offspring whose mothers had a history of both homelessness and a psychiatric disorder, 35·9% (95% CI 27·1-44·8) had been diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder by the age of 15 years.
Parental homelessness was associated with an increased risk of psychiatric disorders in offspring during childhood and adolescence. These findings have important implications for public health and policy because they suggest a need for improvement in the support of socially marginalised families to help prevent psychiatric illness in offspring.
University of Copenhagen, The Lundbeck Foundation Initiative for Integrated Psychiatric Research (iPSYCH).
To study how often severe psychiatric disorders adversely affect a person's ability to be a parent, indicated by the child being placed in out-of-home care.
This study was conducted in 2013 as a prospective, register-based cohort study covering all first-born singletons in the entire Danish population born after 1982 (N = 782,092) and their parents. Rates of out-of-home placement of children with parents diagnosed with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, or unipolar depression, according to the criteria of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 8th revision (ICD-8) and ICD, 10th revision (ICD-10), were analyzed. The rates were compared with those of children with parents from the general population.
A parental diagnosis of schizophrenia was the most prominent risk factor for children placed outside the home, with an accumulated risk for being placed in care at some point during childhood-40% for children with mothers with schizophrenia and 20% for children with fathers with schizophrenia. Children of mothers (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 23.75; 95% CI, 20.94-26.93) and fathers (IRR = 7.85; 95% CI, 6.67-9.25) with a diagnosis of schizophrenia had the overall highest IRRs of placement in care. Having a mother with bipolar disorder was the second most prominent risk factor (IRR = 5.76; 95% CI, 4.50-7.36), followed by a maternal diagnosis of unipolar depression (IRR = 4.28; 95% CI, 3.73-4.90). Risks were especially high during the child's first year of life, indicating a critical period, especially for children with mothers with schizophrenia (IRR = 80.19; 95% CI, 68.09-94.43). Risks varied greatly with parents' socioeconomic factors in all diagnostic groups.
Parental schizophrenia is a strong risk factor for placement of children in out-of-home care.
To evaluate whether integrated treatment (given by OPUS), in comparison with standard treatment, significantly reduced the number of patients with substance abuse and improved clinical and social outcome in the group of substance abusers after 2 years.
A total of 547 patients with first-episode schizophrenia-spectrum disorders were included in the study, 275 randomly assigned to OPUS treatment and 272 to standard treatment. OPUS treatment consisted of assertive community treatment with family involvement and social skills training. Standard treatment offered contact with a community mental health centre. Main outcome measure was reduction in comorbid substance abuse.
At 2-year follow up, 42 (17.3%) patients from OPUS and 40 (20.7%) patients from standard treatment met criteria for substance abuse (odds ratio=0.5, 95% confidence interval 0.3-1.0). OPUS treatment compared with standard treatment significantly reduced negative and disorganized symptoms in the substance abuser group. Patients with substance abuse in the OPUS treatment spent significantly fewer days in hospital during the 2-year period than patients given standard treatment (109 days vs. 167 days) and adhered to treatment significantly more often.
Results from this trial indicate that integrated treatment given by OPUS reduced substance abuse and improved clinical outcome in the substance abuser group. Supplementing the OPUS treatment with therapeutic programmes for patients with a comorbid substance abuse would probably further improve outcome.