Forty patients who had been treated for three years in an ad-hoc, assertive treatment team for patients who had suffered a first psychotic episode were compared to forty patients who had been followed up after a first psychotic episode in a community mental health team. All patients had suffered a first or early psychotic episode. The main differences between the two teams was that the ad-hoc team was assertive in its approach, offered more structured psycho-education, relapse prevention and psycho-social interventions, and had a policy of using atypical anti-psychotics at the lowest effective dose. There were many differences in outcome measures at the end of three years between the two groups. The EI patients are more likely to be taking medication at the end of three years. They are more compliant with medication. They are more likely to be prescribed atypical medication. The EI patients are more likely to have returned to work or education. The EI patients are more likely to remain living with their families. They are less likely to suffer depression to the extent of requiring anti-depressants. They appear to commit less suicide attempts. The patients in the EI service also appear to be less likely to suffer relapse and re-hospitalisation, and are less likely to have involuntary admission to hospital. They have systematic relapse prevention plans based on early warning signs. They and their families receive more psycho-education. These indications suggest that the EI patients are at the end of three years better able to manage their illness/vulnerability on their own than the CMHT patients. More patients in the EI group stopped using illicit drugs than in the CMHT group. All the above changes were statistically significant except for the number of patients who stopped using illicit drugs. In this case it is believed that the sample size was too small to demonstrate significance. These results suggest that an ad-hoc early intervention team is more effective than standard community mental health team in treating psychotic illness.
-
【Three year outcomes of an early intervention for psychosis service as compared with treatment as usual for first psychotic episodes in a standard community mental health team. Preliminary results.].
【与标准社区精神卫生小组中首次精神病发作的常规治疗相比，精神病服务的早期干预的三年结果。初步结果。】
复制标题
收藏
DOI：文章类型：杂志文章
复制DOI
译文
：在社区精神卫生小组中，对在首次精神病发作后接受特设，果断治疗团队治疗的40名患者与在第一次精神病发作后进行了随访的40位患者进行了比较。所有患者均经历了第一次或早期精神病发作。这两个团队之间的主要区别在于，特设团队在方法上很果断，提供了更结构化的心理教育，预防复发和心理社会干预，并制定了以最低有效剂量使用非典型抗精神病药的政策。两组在三年结束时的结局指标之间存在许多差异。 EI患者在三年结束时更有可能服用药物。他们对药物的依从性更高。他们更有可能被开具非典型药物。 EI患者更有可能重返工作岗位或接受教育。 EI患者更有可能继续与家人同住。他们不太可能因需要抗抑郁药而患上抑郁症。他们似乎没有自杀的企图。 EI服务中的患者似乎也不太可能遭受复发和再次住院，并且也不太可能自愿住院。他们根据预警信号制定了系统的预防复发计划。他们和他们的家人接受了更多的心理教育。这些迹象表明，与CMHT患者相比，EI患者在三年结束时能够更好地自行控制疾病/脆弱性。与CMHT组相比，EI组中停止使用违禁药物的患者更多。除停止使用违禁药物的患者人数外，以上所有变化均具有统计学意义。在这种情况下，可以认为样本量太小而无法显示出显着性。这些结果表明，特设的早期干预小组在治疗精神病方面比标准的社区精神卫生小组更有效。
