Sampling from different populations: Sociodemographic, clinical, and functional differences between samples of first episode psychosis individuals and clinical high-risk individuals who progressed to psychosis.

Over the past two decades, research and clinical resources on clinical high risk (CHR) for psychosis have both expanded, with goals to better understanding risk and protective factors on the course of illness and inform early intervention efforts. However, some studies have highlighted potential sampling bias among CHR research studies, raising questions about generalizability of findings and inequitable access to early detection and intervention. The current study sought to explore these questions by comparing 94 participants in a CHR longitudinal monitoring study across North America (NAPLS-2) who converted to syndromal psychosis over the course of the study (CHR-CV) to 171 participants who presented for treatment at a localized first-episode psychosis service (FES) after converting. CHR-CV participants were significantly more likely to be White and have a college-educated parent, while FES participants were more likely to be Black and first- or second-generation immigrants. On average, CHR-CV participants were younger at onset of attenuated positive symptoms, had a longer period of attenuated symptoms prior to conversion, and were more likely to be treated with antipsychotics prior to conversion compared to those in FES programs. After controlling for time since conversion, CHR-CV participants had higher global functioning and were less likely to have experienced recent psychiatric hospitalization. Findings suggest that CHR research and FES clinics may be sampling from different populations, although conclusions are limited by inconsistent sampling frames and methods. Integrated early detection that targets defined geographic catchments may deliver more epidemiologically representative samples to both CHR research and FES.

Reducing Delay From Referral to Admission at a U.S. First-Episode Psychosis Service: A Quality Improvement Initiative.

Duration of untreated psychosis (DUP), the period between psychosis onset and entry into care, is a time of great vulnerability. Longer DUP predicts poorer outcomes, and delayed treatment access can limit the effectiveness of coordinated specialty care (CSC) services. This column details one component of a broader early detection campaign, a quality improvement intervention focusing on reducing the delay between confirmation of eligibility and admission to care within a benchmark period of 7 days. Median delay significantly fell (from 13.5 to 3 days), and the proportion of admissions that met the benchmark increased (from 33% to 71%) over 4 years. This intervention provides a sustainable model to reduce wait times at CSC services.

Predictive validity of conversion from the clinical high risk syndrome to frank psychosis.

Although the clinical high risk for psychosis (CHR) paradigm has become well-established over the past two decades, one key component has received surprisingly little investigative attention: the predictive validity of the criteria for conversion or transition to frank psychosis. The current study evaluates the predictive validity of the transition to psychosis as measured by the Structured Interview for Psychosis-Risk Syndromes (SIPS) in CHR individuals. Participants included 33 SIPS converters and 399 CHR non-converters both from the North American Prodromal Longitudinal Study (NAPLS-2), as well as a sample of 67 separately ascertained first-episode psychosis (FEP) patients from the STEP program. Comparisons were made at baseline and one-year follow-up on demographic, diagnostic stability (SCID), and available measurement domains relating to severity of illness (psychotropic medication, psychosocial treatment, and resource utilization). Principal findings are: 1) a large majority of cases in both SIPS converters (n = 27/33, 81.8%) and FEP (n = 57/67, 85.1%) samples met criteria for continued psychosis at one-year follow-up; 2) follow-up prescription rates for current antipsychotic medication were higher in SIPS converters (n = 17/32, 53.1%) compared to SIPS non-converters (n = 81/397, 20.4%), and similar as compared to FEP cases (n = 39/65, 60%); and 3) at follow-up, SIPS converters had higher rates of resource utilization (psychiatric hospitalizations, day hospital admissions, and ER visits) than SIPS non-converters and were similar to FEP in most categories. The results suggest that the SIPS definition of psychosis onset carries substantial predictive validity. Limitations and future directions are discussed.