Schizophrenia is a debilitating illness that affects an estimated 25 million people worldwide. People with the condition can experience a huge amount of disability (both social, physical and psychological), but we know that early intervention can help reduce the duration of the illness and prevent further episodes of relapse.
People with schizophrenia usually experience a prodromal period before the full blown psychotic illness appears (McGlashan, 2003). This period generally lasts 1-3 years and is characterised by:
- Non-specific behavioural and psychological symptoms
- A deterioration in function
- Positive symptoms that gradually taper off
- Brief limited intermittent psychotic symptoms (BLIPS)
Research has shown that 22-44% of people at ultra high risk will go on to develop schizophrenia.
Early intervention in schizophrenia has two specific elements that are not found in usual care:
- Early detection
- Phase-specific treatment (psychological, social or physical treatment that focuses on early stages of the illness)
There are a number of effective treatments for people at different stages of the illness, but this new systematic review focuses on which interventions can be targeted at people who are at high risk of psychosis, with a view to preventing or delaying the transition.
A Cochrane review on early interventions for psychosis was published in 2011 (Marshall, 2011), but only includes studies that were published up to 2009. This is a fast moving field and this more recent review includes a number of newer trials that have come out in the last couple of years.
Methods
The reviewers searched a wide range of databases for studies published up to November 2011. They targeted randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any psychological, pharmacological, nutritional, or combined intervention with usual services or another treatment.
They excluded studies with participants who had a formal diagnosis of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. Studies were assessed for bias by two independent authors using the Cochrane risk of bias tool.
The primary outcome was transition to psychosis. Secondary outcomes were symptoms of psychosis, depression, mania, quality of life, weight and discontinuation.
They included 11 RCTs in the final analysis, that’s a total of 1,246 patients (mean age 21 years, 57% male).
Results
- Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) reduced transition to psychosis at 12 months (risk ratio 0.54 (95% confidence interval 0.34 to 0.86); risk difference −0.07 (−0.14 to −0.01)
- Omega-3 fatty acids and integrated psychotherapy were also associated with reductions in transition to psychosis at 12 months, but the evidence for these treatments was quite poor
- The review found no evidence that antipsychotic drugs can delay or prevent transition to psychosis. This should be considered an absence of evidence rather than evidence of absence, but nonetheless an important finding in this group, particularly given the side effects of antipsychotics
- Psychotherapies were also associated with significant side effects, with about 10% of participants in such treatment groups deteriorating. The authors highlighted that future trials of talking treatments should report adverse effects
Conclusions
The reviewers concluded:
Schizophrenia and the psychoses are highly disabling, recurrent, and most often lifelong conditions with substantial costs to the patient, their family, and the state; arguably greater than almost all other psychiatric conditions. The possible prevention of transition to psychosis and schizophrenia for people at high risk clearly represents an important finding.
Therefore, further research should be undertaken in the form of a large, multicentre trial of combined family and individual CBT for high risk groups, evaluating both benefits and potential harms (for example, possible increased stigma).
In the meantime, the use of these psychological treatments now represents the most appropriate intervention available for helping people avert what could be a personal, social, and financial catastrophe.
Link
Stafford MR, Jackson H, Mayo-Wilson E, Morrison AP, Kendall T. Early interventions to prevent psychosis: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2013 Jan 18;346:f185. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f185.
McGlashan TH. Commentary: Progress, issues, and implications of prodromal research: an inside view. Schizophr Bull 2003;29:851-8. [PubMed abstract]
Marshall M, Rathbone J. Early intervention for psychosis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2011, Issue 6. Art. No.: CD004718. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004718.pub3.
@Mental_Elf the conclusions are not evidenced based as @Keith_Laws says in this v comprehensive blog post http://t.co/TJxDVtTt
@in_psych Tx, that’s an interesting perspective. The evidence is clearly emerging in this area. I think it’s imprtnt that ppl read the study
.@Mental_Elf @Keith_Laws not sure it’s “clearly emerging” but it’s made it to NICE guideline, so it almost doesn’t matter anymore
@in_psych @Mental_Elf Depends a) if 10+years work means ’emerging’ b) you are happy w/ high risk false pos rate of 90% & c) no effective Tx
@in_psych @Mental_Elf No effective Tx (as such) b/c concept is meaningless – prevent X happening in ppl for whom X very unlikely to happen
@keith_laws @in_psych ‘Emerging’ in that there aren’t many RCTs and those that do exist are quite poor quality…
@keith_laws @in_psych …what treatment recommendations would you suggest for this group of patients, given the evidence?
@Mental_Elf @Keith_Laws Its not possible to reliably identify group of pts that will become psychotic in future
@in_psych @Mental_Elf @Keith_Laws Screen for other treatable illness ?offer most cost effective support/therapy/group (placebo in studies)
@in_psych @Mental_Elf Cost benefit is impt but at 18 months, no difference in conversions btw CBT & controls – so cost becomes infinite!
@in_psych @Mental_Elf Meta analysis doesnt measure adverse events linked to CBT grps – where measured they were greater in CBT than controls
@Keith_Laws @in_psych @mental_elf that’s not a meaningless concept, it’s the concept immunisations are based on! But they’re effective.
@PsychiatrySHO @in_psych @mental_elf There is no parallel *whatsoever* with immunisation
@Keith_Laws @in_psych @mental_elf treating many to save a few sounds like imms. But I’m with u! If tx harmful+no benefit, why give it??
I agree with @in_psych If necessary treat for what they present with (not for what they have very little chance of developing) @Mental_Elf
Agree with @in_psych that ‘High Risk for Psychosis’ cant be treated as a *group* (ironically – this is proven by their divergent outcomes!)