Identifying 2SLGBTQ+ individuals experiencing homelessness using Point-in-Time counts: Evidence from the 2021 Toronto Street Needs Assessment survey.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to utilize the data generated by the City of Toronto, Street Needs Assessment conducted in 2021 to explore the prevalence, causes, experiences, and characteristics of 2-spirit, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and questioning (2SLGBTQ+) individuals experiencing homelessness in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. METHODS: Data was collected by the City of Toronto during its Street Needs Assessment in April 2021. The Street Needs Assessment is a needs assessment survey and Point-in-Time count of people experiencing homelessness across the city of Toronto. Homelessness included any individual who was sleeping outdoors or staying in City-administered emergency/transitional shelters and shelter motels/hotels on the night of data collection. The Street Needs Assessment survey was administered to clients by trained shelter and outreach staff using a computer or mobile device. To ensure that survey questions were 2SLGBTQ+ inclusive, questions on sexual orientation, gender identity, and 2SLGBTQ+ identity were included in the survey. RESULTS: Two hundred and eighty-eight 2SLGBTQ+ individuals completed the survey. Compared to non-2SLGBTQ+ individuals experiencing homelessness, 2SLGBTQ+ respondents were younger at the time of survey completion and when they first experienced homelessness, were more likely to have been in foster care or a group home, reported higher rates of conflict with and/or abuse by a parent/guardian as their main pathway into homelessness, and were more likely to experience chronic homelessness. CONCLUSION: Our study results demonstrate that Street Needs Assessments and Point-in-Time counts can be used to examine homelessness in marginalized populations, including 2SLGBTQ+ individuals and that sexual orientation and gender identity questions need to be included on future government surveys. The consistency of findings from this study and previous research suggests that 2SLGBTQ+ individuals experience a significant need for population-based housing and social support services aimed at meeting the needs of 2SLGBTQ+ populations.

Cost-effectiveness of early intervention services for psychosis and fidelity to national policy implementation guidance.

AIM: Early intervention services (EIS) for psychosis are being implemented, internationally. It is important to learn from established examples and define the components and intensity of services that provide good value for money. This study aims to assess the cost-effectiveness of EIS according to how closely they adhered to the recommendations of the English Department of Health 2001 Policy Implementation Guide (PIG). METHODS: EIS from the National Eden Study were assessed using a measure of fidelity to the PIG that rated the presence or absence of 64 recommended items relating to team structure and practice. EIS were then classified into three groups: those with fidelity of 75-80%, 81-90% and 91-95%. Patient-level resource use and outcomes were measured 1 year following inception into the service; costs were calculated and combined with quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. RESULTS: At a threshold of £20 000 per QALY, the 81-90% fidelity group had a 56.3% likelihood of being the most cost-effective option followed by 75-80% fidelity at 35.8% and 91-95% fidelity group (7.9%). CONCLUSIONS: The results from England suggest that striving to maximize fidelity may not be warranted, but that dropping below a certain level of fidelity may result in inefficient use of resources.

The course of negative symptom in first episode psychosis and the relationship with social recovery.

AIMS: To investigate trajectories of negative symptoms during the first 12months of treatment for first episode psychosis (FEP), their predictors and relationship to social recovery. METHOD: 1006 participants were followed up for 12months following acceptance into Early Intervention in Psychosis services. Negative symptom trajectories were modelled using latent class growth analysis (LCGA) and predictors of trajectories examined using multinomial regression. Social recovery trajectories - also modelled using LCGA - of members of each negative symptom trajectory were ascertained and the relationship between negative symptom and social recovery trajectories examined. RESULTS: Four negative symptom trajectories were identified: Minimal Decreasing (63.9%), Mild Stable (13.5%), High Decreasing (17.1%) and High Stable (5.4%). Male gender and family history of non-affective psychosis predicted stably high negative symptoms. Poor premorbid adolescent adjustment, family history of non-affective psychosis and baseline depression predicted initially high but decreasing negative symptoms. Members of the Mild Stable, High Stable and High Decreasing classes were more likely to experience stably low functioning than the Minimal Decreasing class. CONCLUSIONS: Distinct negative symptom trajectories are evident in FEP. Only a small subgroup present with persistently high levels of negative symptoms. A substantial proportion of FEP patients with elevated negative symptoms at baseline will achieve remission of these symptoms within 12months. However, elevated negative symptoms at baseline, whether or not they remit, are associated with poor social recovery, suggesting targeted interventions for service users with elevated baseline negative symptoms may help improve functional outcomes.

The UK national evaluation of the development and impact of Early Intervention Services (the National EDEN studies): study rationale, design and baseline characteristics.

AIMS: National EDEN aims to evaluate the implementation and impact on key outcomes of somewhat differently configured Early Intervention Services (EIS) across sites in England and to develop a model of variance in patient outcomes that includes key variables of duration of untreated psychosis (DUP), fidelity to the EIS model and service engagement. The cohort is being followed up for two further years as patients are discharged, to observe the stability of change and the impact of the discharge settings. METHODS: A longitudinal cohort study of patients with a first episode of a psychosis, managed by EIS in six services across England. Patients are followed up 12 months after inception, then up to 2 years following discharge. Measures of DUP, psychosis, social functioning and relapse were taken. User and carer experience of EIS were monitored over time; as was the fidelity of each EIS to national guidelines. Service use is costed for a health economic evaluation. RESULTS: 1027 people consented to the study of which 75% were successfully followed up at 12 months, with almost 100% data on treatment, relapse and recovery and service use. CONCLUSIONS: National EDEN is the largest cohort study of young people with psychosis receiving care under EIS. It will be able definitively to indicate whether this major investment in the United Kingdom in EI is achieving meaningful change for its users in practice and provide indications concerning who does well under this approach and who does not, and the long-term stability of any improvements.

Randomised controlled trial of joint crisis plans to reduce compulsory treatment for people with psychosis: economic outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Compulsory admission to psychiatric hospitals may be distressing, disruptive to patients and families, and associated with considerable cost to the health service. Improved patient experience and cost reductions could be realised by providing cost-effective crisis planning services. METHODS: Economic evaluation within a multi-centre randomised controlled trial comparing Joint Crisis Plans (JCP) plus treatment as usual (TAU) to TAU alone for patients aged over 16, with at least one psychiatric hospital admission in the previous two years and on the Enhanced Care Programme Approach register. JCPs, containing the patient's treatment preferences for any future psychiatric emergency, are a form of crisis intervention that aim to mitigate the negative consequences of relapse, including hospital admission and use of coercion. Data were collected at baseline and 18-months after randomisation. The primary outcome was admission to hospital under the Mental Health Act. The economic evaluation took a service perspective (health, social care and criminal justice services) and a societal perspective (additionally including criminal activity and productivity losses). FINDINGS: The addition of JCPs to TAU had no significant effect on compulsory admissions or total societal cost per participant over 18-months follow-up. From the service cost perspective, however, evidence suggests a higher probability (80%) of JCPs being the more cost-effective option. Exploration by ethnic group highlights distinct patterns of costs and effects. Whilst the evidence does not support the cost-effectiveness of JCPs for White or Asian ethnic groups, there is at least a 90% probability of the JCP intervention being the more cost-effective option in the Black ethnic group. INTERPRETATION: The results by ethnic group are sufficiently striking to warrant further investigation into the potential for patient gain from JCPs among black patient groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN11501328.

CRIMSON [CRisis plan IMpact: Subjective and Objective coercion and eNgagement] protocol: a randomised controlled trial of joint crisis plans to reduce compulsory treatment of people with psychosis.

BACKGROUND: The use of compulsory treatment under the Mental Health Act (MHA) has continued to rise in the UK and in other countries. The Joint Crisis Plan (JCP) is a statement of service users' wishes for treatment in the event of a future mental health crisis. It is developed with the clinical team and an independent facilitator. A recent pilot RCT showed a reduction in the use of the MHA amongst service users with a JCP. The JCP is the only intervention that has been shown to reduce compulsory treatment in this way. The CRIMSON trial aims to determine if JCPs, compared with treatment as usual, are effective in reducing the use of the MHA in a range of treatment settings across the UK. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a 3 centre, individual-level, single-blind, randomised controlled trial of the JCP compared with treatment as usual for people with a history of relapsing psychotic illness in Birmingham, London and Lancashire/Manchester. 540 service users will be recruited across the three sites. Eligible service users will be adults with a diagnosis of a psychotic disorder (including bipolar disorder), treated in the community under the Care Programme Approach with at least one admission to a psychiatric inpatient ward in the previous two years. Current inpatients and those subject to a community treatment order will be excluded to avoid any potential perceived pressure to participate. Research assessments will be conducted at baseline and 18 months. Following the baseline assessment, eligible service users will be randomly allocated to either develop a Joint Crisis Plan or continue with treatment as usual. Outcome will be assessed at 18 months with assessors blind to treatment allocation. The primary outcome is the proportion of service users treated or otherwise detained under an order of the Mental Health Act (MHA) during the follow-up period, compared across randomisation groups. Secondary outcomes include overall costs, service user engagement, perceived coercion and therapeutic relationships. Sub-analyses will explore the effectiveness of the JCP in reducing use of the MHA specifically for Black Caribbean and Black African service users (combined). Qualitative investigations with staff and service users will explore the acceptability of the JCPs. DISCUSSION: JCPs offer a potential solution to the rise of compulsory treatment for individuals with psychotic disorders and, if shown to be effective in this trial, they are likely to be of interest to mental health service providers worldwide. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN11501328.

Day hospital versus outpatient care for people with schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: This review considers the use of day hospitals as an alternative to outpatient care. Two types of day hospital are covered by the review: 'day treatment programmes' and 'transitional' day hospitals. Day treatment programmes offer more intense treatment for people who have failed to respond to outpatient care. Transitional day hospitals offer time-limited care to people who have just been discharged from inpatient care. OBJECTIVES: To assess effects of day hospital care as an alternative to continuing outpatient care for people with schizophrenia and and other similar severe mental illness. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (May 2009) and references of all identified studies for further citations. If necessary, we also contacted authors of trials for further information. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing day hospital care with outpatient care for those with schizophrenia and other similar severe mental illness. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted and cross-checked data independently. We analysed dichotomous data using fixed-effect relative risk (RR) and estimated the 95% confidence interval (CI). If continuous data were included, we analysed this data using the random-effects weighted mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval. MAIN RESULTS: We identified four relevant trials all dating from before 1986 (total n=309 participants); all but one of which (n=37) evaluated day treatment centres. Across time less people allocated to day hospital care tend to be admitted to hospital (beyond one year: n=242, 2 RCTs, RR 0.71 CI 0.56 to 0.89 day treatment centres) but data are heterogeneous (I(2) =74% P=0.05) and should not be taken into account. Data on time spent as an inpatient seem to support this finding but are poorly reported. We found no clear difference between day hospital and outpatient care for the outcome of 'lost to follow up' (at six months: n=147, 3 RCTs, RR 0.97 CI 0.48 to 1.95; at 12 months: n=117, 2 RCTs, RR 0.97 CI 0.48 to 1.95 day treatment centres / transitional day hospital). Scale derived findings on social functioning are equivocal (SAS: n=37, 1 RCT, MD 0.36 CI -0.07 to 0.79 transitional day hospital) but there was some suggestion from small studies that day hospital care may decrease the risk of unemployment (at 12 months: n=80, 1 RCT, RR 0.86 CI 0.69 to 1.06 day treatment centre). Different measures of mental state showed no convincing effect (Symptom Check List: n=30, 1 RCT, MD -90 0.31 CI -0.20 to 0.82 day treatment centre). Poorly reported economic data from decades ago suggested that day hospitals were more costly to establish and run than outpatient care but took no account of other costs such as inpatient stay. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence is limited and dated. Day hospital care may help avoid inpatient care but data are lacking on missing on a raft of outcomes that are now considered important, such as quality of life, satisfaction, healthy days, and cost.