Information on determinants of duration of untreated psychosis (DUP) is still needed to inform campaigns targeting people with first episode psychosis (FEP). This nation-wide study analysed the association between demographic factors (age, sex, ethnicity, marital status, and geographic area), premorbid and illness-related factors (global functional level, substance misuse, and contact to police), healthcare factors (referral source and first FEP contact) and DUP.
The study population of 1266 patients aged 15-25years diagnosed with FEP (ICD10 F20.0-F20.99) was drawn from the Danish National Indicator Project during 2009-2011. The study population was combined with data from national administrative registers. A multinomial regression model was estimated to analyse the impact of demographic, premorbid and illness-related, and healthcare factors on DUP.
One third of the population had a DUP below 6months. DUP longer than 12months was associated with older age at onset, being female, having cannabis misuse, and living in peripheral municipalities. Being charged by the criminal authorities during one year before FEP was associated with a DUP over 6months.
DUP is related to a number of demographic, premorbid and healthcare factors. These findings suggest that future information campaigns should focus on increasing the awareness of early signs of psychosis not only among mental health professionals but also other professionals in contact with adolescents such as the police. It may also be useful to consider how to target information campaigns towards persons living in peripheral areas.
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.