Nirupamal Pitigala, Irene Zeng, Nishanth Narayanan, Sarah Cullum, Lillian Ng
{"title":"跟踪早期精神病干预服务转诊的 3 年轨迹。","authors":"Nirupamal Pitigala, Irene Zeng, Nishanth Narayanan, Sarah Cullum, Lillian Ng","doi":"10.1177/10398562241251999","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To review the baseline and clinical characteristics of patients referred to a New Zealand Early Psychosis Intervention (EPI) service across a 4-year timeframe.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We compared two cohorts, and identified variables associated with being accepted or declined, and reasons for decline, by an EPI service between 2013 and 2017.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 576 people with suspected psychosis referred to the EPI service for assessment: 300 (52%) were accepted, 221 (38%) declined and 55 (10%) were not processed. Reasons for being declined by EPI services were a long duration of psychosis (DUP, 48%) and no evidence of psychosis (47%). There were no significant differences between the accepted and declined group in Emergency Department presentations for self-harm or suicide attempts and acute admissions to a psychiatric inpatient unit over the 3-year follow-up period.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>To optimise the identification of true positive cases, EPI services require clear entry criteria. Replicating this study in other EPI services with different entry criteria may provide evidence to develop a more uniform screening process. Improved outcomes may be enhanced by measuring effectiveness and liaising with other EPI services.</p>","PeriodicalId":8630,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Psychiatry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11318223/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tracking the 3-year trajectory of referrals to an early psychosis intervention service.\",\"authors\":\"Nirupamal Pitigala, Irene Zeng, Nishanth Narayanan, Sarah Cullum, Lillian Ng\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10398562241251999\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To review the baseline and clinical characteristics of patients referred to a New Zealand Early Psychosis Intervention (EPI) service across a 4-year timeframe.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We compared two cohorts, and identified variables associated with being accepted or declined, and reasons for decline, by an EPI service between 2013 and 2017.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 576 people with suspected psychosis referred to the EPI service for assessment: 300 (52%) were accepted, 221 (38%) declined and 55 (10%) were not processed. Reasons for being declined by EPI services were a long duration of psychosis (DUP, 48%) and no evidence of psychosis (47%). There were no significant differences between the accepted and declined group in Emergency Department presentations for self-harm or suicide attempts and acute admissions to a psychiatric inpatient unit over the 3-year follow-up period.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>To optimise the identification of true positive cases, EPI services require clear entry criteria. Replicating this study in other EPI services with different entry criteria may provide evidence to develop a more uniform screening process. Improved outcomes may be enhanced by measuring effectiveness and liaising with other EPI services.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8630,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australasian Psychiatry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11318223/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australasian Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10398562241251999\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australasian Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10398562241251999","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Tracking the 3-year trajectory of referrals to an early psychosis intervention service.
Aim: To review the baseline and clinical characteristics of patients referred to a New Zealand Early Psychosis Intervention (EPI) service across a 4-year timeframe.
Method: We compared two cohorts, and identified variables associated with being accepted or declined, and reasons for decline, by an EPI service between 2013 and 2017.
Results: There were 576 people with suspected psychosis referred to the EPI service for assessment: 300 (52%) were accepted, 221 (38%) declined and 55 (10%) were not processed. Reasons for being declined by EPI services were a long duration of psychosis (DUP, 48%) and no evidence of psychosis (47%). There were no significant differences between the accepted and declined group in Emergency Department presentations for self-harm or suicide attempts and acute admissions to a psychiatric inpatient unit over the 3-year follow-up period.
Conclusion: To optimise the identification of true positive cases, EPI services require clear entry criteria. Replicating this study in other EPI services with different entry criteria may provide evidence to develop a more uniform screening process. Improved outcomes may be enhanced by measuring effectiveness and liaising with other EPI services.
期刊介绍:
Australasian Psychiatry is the bi-monthly journal of The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists (RANZCP) that aims to promote the art of psychiatry and its maintenance of excellence in practice. The journal is peer-reviewed and accepts submissions, presented as original research; reviews; descriptions of innovative services; comments on policy, history, politics, economics, training, ethics and the Arts as they relate to mental health and mental health services; statements of opinion and letters. Book reviews are commissioned by the editor. A section of the journal provides information on RANZCP business and related matters.