Dasha Nicholls, Jobie Budd, Philippa Nunn, Paul French, Jo Smith, Veenu Gupta, Jonathan Holdship, Alan Quirk
{"title":"调查首发精神病患者治疗结果的不平等现象","authors":"Dasha Nicholls, Jobie Budd, Philippa Nunn, Paul French, Jo Smith, Veenu Gupta, Jonathan Holdship, Alan Quirk","doi":"10.1192/bjp.2024.132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<span>Background</span><p>Understanding inequalities in outcomes between demographic groups is a necessary step in addressing them in clinical care. Inequalities in treatment uptake between demographic groups may explain disparities in outcomes in people with first-episode psychosis (FEP).</p><span>Aims</span><p>To investigate disparities between broad demographic groups in symptomatic improvement in patients with FEP and their relationship to treatment uptake.</p><span>Method</span><p>We used data from 6813 patients from the 2021–2022 National Clinical Audit of Psychosis data-set. Data were grouped by category type to obtain mean outcomes before adjustment to see whether disparities in outcomes remained after differences in treatment uptake had been accounted for. After matching, the average effect of each demographic variable in terms of outcome change was calculated. Moderator effects on specific treatments were investigated using interaction terms in a regression model.</p><span>Results</span><p>Observational results showed that patients aged 18–24 years were less likely to improve in outcome, unless adjusted for intervention uptake. Patients classified as Black and Black British were less likely to improve in outcome (moderation effect 0.04, 95% CI 0–0.07) after adjusting for treatment take-up and demographic factors. Regression analysis showed the general positive effect of supported employment interventions in improving outcomes (coefficient −0.13, 95% CI −0.07 to −0.18, <span>P</span> < 0.001), and moderator analysis suggested targeting particular groups for interventions.</p><span>Conclusions</span><p>Inequalities in treatment uptake and psychotic symptom outcome of FEP by social and demographic factors require monitoring over time. Our analysis provides a framework for monitoring health inequalities across national clinical audits in the UK.</p>","PeriodicalId":22495,"journal":{"name":"The British Journal of Psychiatry","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Investigating inequalities in patient outcomes for first-episode psychosis\",\"authors\":\"Dasha Nicholls, Jobie Budd, Philippa Nunn, Paul French, Jo Smith, Veenu Gupta, Jonathan Holdship, Alan Quirk\",\"doi\":\"10.1192/bjp.2024.132\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<span>Background</span><p>Understanding inequalities in outcomes between demographic groups is a necessary step in addressing them in clinical care. Inequalities in treatment uptake between demographic groups may explain disparities in outcomes in people with first-episode psychosis (FEP).</p><span>Aims</span><p>To investigate disparities between broad demographic groups in symptomatic improvement in patients with FEP and their relationship to treatment uptake.</p><span>Method</span><p>We used data from 6813 patients from the 2021–2022 National Clinical Audit of Psychosis data-set. Data were grouped by category type to obtain mean outcomes before adjustment to see whether disparities in outcomes remained after differences in treatment uptake had been accounted for. After matching, the average effect of each demographic variable in terms of outcome change was calculated. Moderator effects on specific treatments were investigated using interaction terms in a regression model.</p><span>Results</span><p>Observational results showed that patients aged 18–24 years were less likely to improve in outcome, unless adjusted for intervention uptake. Patients classified as Black and Black British were less likely to improve in outcome (moderation effect 0.04, 95% CI 0–0.07) after adjusting for treatment take-up and demographic factors. Regression analysis showed the general positive effect of supported employment interventions in improving outcomes (coefficient −0.13, 95% CI −0.07 to −0.18, <span>P</span> < 0.001), and moderator analysis suggested targeting particular groups for interventions.</p><span>Conclusions</span><p>Inequalities in treatment uptake and psychotic symptom outcome of FEP by social and demographic factors require monitoring over time. Our analysis provides a framework for monitoring health inequalities across national clinical audits in the UK.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22495,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The British Journal of Psychiatry\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The British Journal of Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.2024.132\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The British Journal of Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.2024.132","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景了解不同人口群体之间治疗结果的不平等是在临床治疗中解决这些问题的必要步骤。Aims To investigate disparities between broad demographic groups in symptomatic improvement in patients with FEP and their relationship to treatment uptake.MethodWe used data from 6813 patients from the 2021-2022 National Clinical Audit of Psychosis data-set.数据按照类别类型进行分组,以获得调整前的平均结果,从而了解在考虑治疗接受率的差异后,结果是否仍存在差异。经过匹配后,计算出每个人口统计学变量对结果变化的平均影响。结果观察结果表明,除非根据干预措施的接受情况进行调整,否则年龄在 18-24 岁的患者的治疗效果较难改善。黑人和英国黑人患者的疗效改善可能性较小(调节效应为 0.04,95% CI 为 0-0.07),这是在对治疗接受情况和人口统计学因素进行调整后得出的结果。回归分析表明,支持性就业干预措施在改善疗效方面具有普遍的积极作用(系数为-0.13,95% CI为-0.07至-0.18,P< 0.001),调节效应分析建议针对特定群体采取干预措施。我们的分析为监测英国全国临床审计中的健康不平等现象提供了一个框架。
Investigating inequalities in patient outcomes for first-episode psychosis
Background
Understanding inequalities in outcomes between demographic groups is a necessary step in addressing them in clinical care. Inequalities in treatment uptake between demographic groups may explain disparities in outcomes in people with first-episode psychosis (FEP).
Aims
To investigate disparities between broad demographic groups in symptomatic improvement in patients with FEP and their relationship to treatment uptake.
Method
We used data from 6813 patients from the 2021–2022 National Clinical Audit of Psychosis data-set. Data were grouped by category type to obtain mean outcomes before adjustment to see whether disparities in outcomes remained after differences in treatment uptake had been accounted for. After matching, the average effect of each demographic variable in terms of outcome change was calculated. Moderator effects on specific treatments were investigated using interaction terms in a regression model.
Results
Observational results showed that patients aged 18–24 years were less likely to improve in outcome, unless adjusted for intervention uptake. Patients classified as Black and Black British were less likely to improve in outcome (moderation effect 0.04, 95% CI 0–0.07) after adjusting for treatment take-up and demographic factors. Regression analysis showed the general positive effect of supported employment interventions in improving outcomes (coefficient −0.13, 95% CI −0.07 to −0.18, P < 0.001), and moderator analysis suggested targeting particular groups for interventions.
Conclusions
Inequalities in treatment uptake and psychotic symptom outcome of FEP by social and demographic factors require monitoring over time. Our analysis provides a framework for monitoring health inequalities across national clinical audits in the UK.