A comparison of pathways to care in at-risk mental states and first episode psychosis: a mental health electronic clinical records analysis in the East of England, UK.

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Rhiannon Murden, Sophie M Allan, Jo Hodgekins, Sheri Oduola
{"title":"A comparison of pathways to care in at-risk mental states and first episode psychosis: a mental health electronic clinical records analysis in the East of England, UK.","authors":"Rhiannon Murden, Sophie M Allan, Jo Hodgekins, Sheri Oduola","doi":"10.1007/s00127-025-02833-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Delays in treatment for individuals experiencing early signs of psychosis are associated with poorer outcomes. Few people presenting with first episode psychosis (FEP) access early intervention in psychosis (EIP) services during the prodromal stage. In this study, we compared pathways to care (PtC) in people with At-Risk Mental States (ARMS) and FEP and explored the sociodemographic factors associated with accessing EIP during ARMS or FEP.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sociodemographic and PtC data were collected from the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust (CPFT) Research Database. All individuals referred and accepted to CPFT EIP services as either ARMS or FEP between 1st April 2018 and 31st October 2019 (N = 158) were included.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was strong evidence that ARMS patients accessing EIP were younger and were less likely to have a minority ethnic status than FEP patients. In terms of PtC, ARMS patients had fewer numbers of contacts, were less likely to be referred via the acute services, less likely to be involuntarily admitted and had reduced family involvement in their help-seeking. No differences were identified between ARMS and FEP in terms of living circumstances, area-level deprivation, urbanicity, employment status, duration of PtC, or police involvement in PtC.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings highlight that disparities exist between ARMS and FEP patients in terms of sociodemographic and PtC characteristics. Further research is required to replicate these findings and investigate the effectiveness of interventions to encourage and facilitate access to EIP at an earlier stage to improve outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":49510,"journal":{"name":"Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-025-02833-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Delays in treatment for individuals experiencing early signs of psychosis are associated with poorer outcomes. Few people presenting with first episode psychosis (FEP) access early intervention in psychosis (EIP) services during the prodromal stage. In this study, we compared pathways to care (PtC) in people with At-Risk Mental States (ARMS) and FEP and explored the sociodemographic factors associated with accessing EIP during ARMS or FEP.

Methods: Sociodemographic and PtC data were collected from the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust (CPFT) Research Database. All individuals referred and accepted to CPFT EIP services as either ARMS or FEP between 1st April 2018 and 31st October 2019 (N = 158) were included.

Results: There was strong evidence that ARMS patients accessing EIP were younger and were less likely to have a minority ethnic status than FEP patients. In terms of PtC, ARMS patients had fewer numbers of contacts, were less likely to be referred via the acute services, less likely to be involuntarily admitted and had reduced family involvement in their help-seeking. No differences were identified between ARMS and FEP in terms of living circumstances, area-level deprivation, urbanicity, employment status, duration of PtC, or police involvement in PtC.

Conclusion: Our findings highlight that disparities exist between ARMS and FEP patients in terms of sociodemographic and PtC characteristics. Further research is required to replicate these findings and investigate the effectiveness of interventions to encourage and facilitate access to EIP at an earlier stage to improve outcomes.

高危精神状态和初发精神病护理路径比较:英国英格兰东部精神健康电子临床记录分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
2.30%
发文量
184
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology is intended to provide a medium for the prompt publication of scientific contributions concerned with all aspects of the epidemiology of psychiatric disorders - social, biological and genetic. In addition, the journal has a particular focus on the effects of social conditions upon behaviour and the relationship between psychiatric disorders and the social environment. Contributions may be of a clinical nature provided they relate to social issues, or they may deal with specialised investigations in the fields of social psychology, sociology, anthropology, epidemiology, health service research, health economies or public mental health. We will publish papers on cross-cultural and trans-cultural themes. We do not publish case studies or small case series. While we will publish studies of reliability and validity of new instruments of interest to our readership, we will not publish articles reporting on the performance of established instruments in translation. Both original work and review articles may be submitted.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信