The Early Youth Engagement (EYE-2) intervention in first-episode psychosis services: pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial and cost-effectiveness evaluation

Kathryn Greenwood, Christopher Jones, Nahel Yaziji, Andrew Healey, Carl May, Stephen Bremner, Richard Hooper, Shanaya Rathod, Peter Phiri, Richard de Visser, Tanya Mackay, Gergely Bartl, Iga Abramowicz, Jenny Gu, Rebecca Webb, Sunil Nandha, Belinda Lennox, Louise Johns, Paul French, Jo Hodgekins, Heather Law, James Plaistow, Rose Thompson, David Fowler, Philippa Garety, Anastacia O'Donnell, Michelle Painter, Rebecca Jarvis, Stuart Clark, Emmanuelle Peters
{"title":"The Early Youth Engagement (EYE-2) intervention in first-episode psychosis services: pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial and cost-effectiveness evaluation","authors":"Kathryn Greenwood, Christopher Jones, Nahel Yaziji, Andrew Healey, Carl May, Stephen Bremner, Richard Hooper, Shanaya Rathod, Peter Phiri, Richard de Visser, Tanya Mackay, Gergely Bartl, Iga Abramowicz, Jenny Gu, Rebecca Webb, Sunil Nandha, Belinda Lennox, Louise Johns, Paul French, Jo Hodgekins, Heather Law, James Plaistow, Rose Thompson, David Fowler, Philippa Garety, Anastacia O'Donnell, Michelle Painter, Rebecca Jarvis, Stuart Clark, Emmanuelle Peters","doi":"10.1192/bjp.2024.154","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<span>Background</span><p>Early intervention in psychosis (EIP) services improve outcomes for young people, but approximately 30% disengage.</p><span>Aims</span><p>To test whether a new motivational engagement intervention would prolong engagement and whether it was cost-effective.</p><span>Method</span><p>We conducted a multicentre, single-blind, parallel-group, cluster randomised controlled trial involving 20 EIP teams at five UK National Health Service (NHS) sites. Teams were randomised using permuted blocks stratified by NHS trust. Participants were all young people (aged 14–35 years) presenting with a first episode of psychosis between May 2019 and July 2020 (<span>N</span> = 1027). We compared the novel Early Youth Engagement (EYE-2) intervention plus standardised EIP (sEIP) with sEIP alone. The primary outcome was time to disengagement over 12–26 months. Economic outcomes were mental health costs, societal costs and socio-occupational outcomes over 12 months. Assessors were masked to treatment allocation for primary disengagement and cost-effectiveness outcomes. Analysis followed intention-to-treat principles. The trial was registered at ISRCTN51629746.</p><span>Results</span><p>Disengagement was low at 15.9% overall in standardised stand-alone services. The adjusted hazard ratio for EYE-2 + sEIP (<span>n</span> = 652) versus sEIP alone (<span>n</span> = 375) was 1.07 (95% CI 0.76–1.49; <span>P</span> = 0.713). The health economic evaluation indicated lower mental healthcare costs linked to reductions in unplanned mental healthcare with no compromise of clinical outcomes, as well as some evidence for lower societal costs and more days in education, training, employment and stable accommodation in the EYE-2 group.</p><span>Conclusions</span><p>We found no evidence that EYE-2 increased time to disengagement, but there was some evidence for its cost-effectiveness. This is the largest study to date reporting positive engagement, health and cost outcomes in a total EIP population sample. Limitations included high loss to follow-up for secondary outcomes and low completion of societal and socio-occupational data. COVID-19 affected fidelity and implementation. Future engagement research should target engagement to those in greatest need, including in-patients and those with socio-occupational goals.</p>","PeriodicalId":22495,"journal":{"name":"The British Journal of Psychiatry","volume":"80 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-25","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.2024.154","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Early intervention in psychosis (EIP) services improve outcomes for young people, but approximately 30% disengage.

Aims

To test whether a new motivational engagement intervention would prolong engagement and whether it was cost-effective.

Method

We conducted a multicentre, single-blind, parallel-group, cluster randomised controlled trial involving 20 EIP teams at five UK National Health Service (NHS) sites. Teams were randomised using permuted blocks stratified by NHS trust. Participants were all young people (aged 14–35 years) presenting with a first episode of psychosis between May 2019 and July 2020 (N = 1027). We compared the novel Early Youth Engagement (EYE-2) intervention plus standardised EIP (sEIP) with sEIP alone. The primary outcome was time to disengagement over 12–26 months. Economic outcomes were mental health costs, societal costs and socio-occupational outcomes over 12 months. Assessors were masked to treatment allocation for primary disengagement and cost-effectiveness outcomes. Analysis followed intention-to-treat principles. The trial was registered at ISRCTN51629746.

Results

Disengagement was low at 15.9% overall in standardised stand-alone services. The adjusted hazard ratio for EYE-2 + sEIP (n = 652) versus sEIP alone (n = 375) was 1.07 (95% CI 0.76–1.49; P = 0.713). The health economic evaluation indicated lower mental healthcare costs linked to reductions in unplanned mental healthcare with no compromise of clinical outcomes, as well as some evidence for lower societal costs and more days in education, training, employment and stable accommodation in the EYE-2 group.

Conclusions

We found no evidence that EYE-2 increased time to disengagement, but there was some evidence for its cost-effectiveness. This is the largest study to date reporting positive engagement, health and cost outcomes in a total EIP population sample. Limitations included high loss to follow-up for secondary outcomes and low completion of societal and socio-occupational data. COVID-19 affected fidelity and implementation. Future engagement research should target engagement to those in greatest need, including in-patients and those with socio-occupational goals.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
首发精神病服务中的 "青少年早期参与"(EYE-2)干预:实用分组随机对照试验和成本效益评估
方法我们开展了一项多中心、单盲、平行组、群组随机对照试验,涉及英国国家医疗服务系统(NHS)的五个地点的 20 个 EIP 团队。试验采用按NHS信托机构分层的随机分组法。参与者均为在 2019 年 5 月至 2020 年 7 月期间首次发病的年轻人(14-35 岁)(N = 1027)。我们将新颖的 "青年早期参与"(EYE-2)干预加标准化 EIP(sEIP)与单独的 sEIP 进行了比较。主要结果是 12-26 个月的脱离时间。经济结果是12个月内的心理健康成本、社会成本和社会职业结果。评估人员对主要脱离治疗和成本效益结果的治疗分配进行了蒙蔽。分析遵循意向治疗原则。该试验的注册号为 ISRCTN51629746。结果在标准化的独立服务中,脱离率较低,总体为 15.9%。EYE-2 + sEIP(n = 652)与单独使用 sEIP(n = 375)的调整后危险比为 1.07(95% CI 0.76-1.49;P = 0.713)。健康经济评价结果表明,EYE-2 组在不影响临床结果的情况下,减少了非计划性精神医疗,从而降低了精神医疗成本,同时还有一些证据表明,EYE-2 组的社会成本更低,教育、培训、就业和稳定住所的天数更多。这是迄今为止规模最大的一项研究,报告了全部 EIP 人口样本在参与、健康和成本方面的积极成果。不足之处包括次要结果的随访损失率高,社会和社会职业数据的完成率低。COVID-19 影响了忠实度和实施。未来的参与研究应针对最需要参与的人群,包括住院病人和有社会职业目标的人群。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A brief critique of the pseudo-diagnosis ‘complex emotional needs’ Transdiagnostic use of 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine-assisted therapy to treat obsessive–compulsive disorder Professorships in child and adolescent psychiatry relative to a similarly sized medical specialty in the UK and Ireland: cross-sectional study Neural processes linking joint hypermobility and anxiety: key roles for the amygdala and insular cortex Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on self-harm and self-harm/suicide ideation: population wide, data linkage study and time series analysis: Commentary, Patra et al
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1