Qualitative Analysis of Telephone Logs: Client Engagement and Barriers to Completing an Initial Early Psychosis Assessment.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Adi Rosenthal, Monet S Meyer, Khalima Bolden-Thompson, Sarah Gobrial, Ruth Shim, Tyler A Lesh, J Daniel Ragland, Rachel Loewy, Mark Savill, Cameron S Carter, Tara A Niendam
{"title":"Qualitative Analysis of Telephone Logs: Client Engagement and Barriers to Completing an Initial Early Psychosis Assessment.","authors":"Adi Rosenthal, Monet S Meyer, Khalima Bolden-Thompson, Sarah Gobrial, Ruth Shim, Tyler A Lesh, J Daniel Ragland, Rachel Loewy, Mark Savill, Cameron S Carter, Tara A Niendam","doi":"10.1176/appi.ps.20230465","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Time between the onset of psychosis and the start of treatment significantly influences outcomes. Rapid access to care is essential, yet barriers such as stigma, difficulties with navigating the mental health system, and financial constraints prolong this process. This mixed-methods study aimed to assess how these barriers affect participation in early psychosis services.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A directed content analysis of telephone log data was conducted from intake assessments at an early psychosis clinic. Stepwise logistic regression and analyses of variance were used to evaluate the impact of barriers on assessment completion and time from referral to assessment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 1,048 individuals screened for early psychosis services, 201 completed a telephone assessment. Individuals who dropped out had a higher proportion of barriers overall than did those who completed the assessment (p<0.01). Greater than 50% of interactions included at least one barrier, with logistical issues being the most common. Increased barriers were correlated with longer assessments and lower completion rates. Adults and Hispanic participants reported more barriers, compared with adolescents and non-Hispanic individuals, respectively. Significant contributors to nonengagement included unknown gender, public insurance, and various barriers.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Identifiable barriers to intake assessment were frequently reported by clients and were associated with higher intake noncompletion and a longer assessment process. Efforts to address logistical barriers may represent an essential step in improving the linkage process and reducing the duration of untreated psychosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":20878,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatric services","volume":" ","pages":"appips20230465"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychiatric services","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.20230465","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Time between the onset of psychosis and the start of treatment significantly influences outcomes. Rapid access to care is essential, yet barriers such as stigma, difficulties with navigating the mental health system, and financial constraints prolong this process. This mixed-methods study aimed to assess how these barriers affect participation in early psychosis services.

Methods: A directed content analysis of telephone log data was conducted from intake assessments at an early psychosis clinic. Stepwise logistic regression and analyses of variance were used to evaluate the impact of barriers on assessment completion and time from referral to assessment.

Results: Of 1,048 individuals screened for early psychosis services, 201 completed a telephone assessment. Individuals who dropped out had a higher proportion of barriers overall than did those who completed the assessment (p<0.01). Greater than 50% of interactions included at least one barrier, with logistical issues being the most common. Increased barriers were correlated with longer assessments and lower completion rates. Adults and Hispanic participants reported more barriers, compared with adolescents and non-Hispanic individuals, respectively. Significant contributors to nonengagement included unknown gender, public insurance, and various barriers.

Conclusions: Identifiable barriers to intake assessment were frequently reported by clients and were associated with higher intake noncompletion and a longer assessment process. Efforts to address logistical barriers may represent an essential step in improving the linkage process and reducing the duration of untreated psychosis.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Psychiatric services
Psychiatric services 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
7.90%
发文量
295
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Psychiatric Services, established in 1950, is published monthly by the American Psychiatric Association. The peer-reviewed journal features research reports on issues related to the delivery of mental health services, especially for people with serious mental illness in community-based treatment programs. Long known as an interdisciplinary journal, Psychiatric Services recognizes that provision of high-quality care involves collaboration among a variety of professionals, frequently working as a team. Authors of research reports published in the journal include psychiatrists, psychologists, pharmacists, nurses, social workers, drug and alcohol treatment counselors, economists, policy analysts, and professionals in related systems such as criminal justice and welfare systems. In the mental health field, the current focus on patient-centered, recovery-oriented care and on dissemination of evidence-based practices is transforming service delivery systems at all levels. Research published in Psychiatric Services contributes to this transformation.
×
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