跟踪早期精神病干预服务转诊的 3 年轨迹。

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q4 PSYCHIATRY Australasian Psychiatry Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-09 DOI:10.1177/10398562241251999
Nirupamal Pitigala, Irene Zeng, Nishanth Narayanan, Sarah Cullum, Lillian Ng
{"title":"跟踪早期精神病干预服务转诊的 3 年轨迹。","authors":"Nirupamal Pitigala, Irene Zeng, Nishanth Narayanan, Sarah Cullum, Lillian Ng","doi":"10.1177/10398562241251999","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To review the baseline and clinical characteristics of patients referred to a New Zealand Early Psychosis Intervention (EPI) service across a 4-year timeframe.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We compared two cohorts, and identified variables associated with being accepted or declined, and reasons for decline, by an EPI service between 2013 and 2017.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 576 people with suspected psychosis referred to the EPI service for assessment: 300 (52%) were accepted, 221 (38%) declined and 55 (10%) were not processed. Reasons for being declined by EPI services were a long duration of psychosis (DUP, 48%) and no evidence of psychosis (47%). There were no significant differences between the accepted and declined group in Emergency Department presentations for self-harm or suicide attempts and acute admissions to a psychiatric inpatient unit over the 3-year follow-up period.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>To optimise the identification of true positive cases, EPI services require clear entry criteria. Replicating this study in other EPI services with different entry criteria may provide evidence to develop a more uniform screening process. Improved outcomes may be enhanced by measuring effectiveness and liaising with other EPI services.</p>","PeriodicalId":8630,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Psychiatry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11318223/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tracking the 3-year trajectory of referrals to an early psychosis intervention service.\",\"authors\":\"Nirupamal Pitigala, Irene Zeng, Nishanth Narayanan, Sarah Cullum, Lillian Ng\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10398562241251999\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To review the baseline and clinical characteristics of patients referred to a New Zealand Early Psychosis Intervention (EPI) service across a 4-year timeframe.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We compared two cohorts, and identified variables associated with being accepted or declined, and reasons for decline, by an EPI service between 2013 and 2017.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 576 people with suspected psychosis referred to the EPI service for assessment: 300 (52%) were accepted, 221 (38%) declined and 55 (10%) were not processed. Reasons for being declined by EPI services were a long duration of psychosis (DUP, 48%) and no evidence of psychosis (47%). There were no significant differences between the accepted and declined group in Emergency Department presentations for self-harm or suicide attempts and acute admissions to a psychiatric inpatient unit over the 3-year follow-up period.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>To optimise the identification of true positive cases, EPI services require clear entry criteria. Replicating this study in other EPI services with different entry criteria may provide evidence to develop a more uniform screening process. Improved outcomes may be enhanced by measuring effectiveness and liaising with other EPI services.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8630,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australasian Psychiatry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11318223/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australasian Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10398562241251999\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australasian Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10398562241251999","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:回顾新西兰早期精神病干预(EPI)服务机构在4年时间内转诊患者的基线和临床特征:我们比较了两个队列,并确定了2013年至2017年间被EPI服务接受或拒绝的相关变量以及拒绝的原因:共有 576 名疑似精神病患者被转介到 EPI 服务机构接受评估:300人(52%)被接受,221人(38%)被拒绝,55人(10%)未被处理。被 EPI 服务拒绝的原因是精神病持续时间过长(DUP,48%)和没有精神病证据(47%)。在为期3年的随访期间,接受组和拒绝组在急诊科自残或自杀未遂的就诊率以及精神科住院病人的急性入院率方面没有明显差异:为了更好地识别真正的阳性病例,EPI 服务需要明确的入选标准。在其他具有不同入选标准的 EPI 服务机构复制这项研究,可为制定更统一的筛查流程提供证据。通过衡量成效并与其他扩大免疫方案服务机构联系,可提高成果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Tracking the 3-year trajectory of referrals to an early psychosis intervention service.

Aim: To review the baseline and clinical characteristics of patients referred to a New Zealand Early Psychosis Intervention (EPI) service across a 4-year timeframe.

Method: We compared two cohorts, and identified variables associated with being accepted or declined, and reasons for decline, by an EPI service between 2013 and 2017.

Results: There were 576 people with suspected psychosis referred to the EPI service for assessment: 300 (52%) were accepted, 221 (38%) declined and 55 (10%) were not processed. Reasons for being declined by EPI services were a long duration of psychosis (DUP, 48%) and no evidence of psychosis (47%). There were no significant differences between the accepted and declined group in Emergency Department presentations for self-harm or suicide attempts and acute admissions to a psychiatric inpatient unit over the 3-year follow-up period.

Conclusion: To optimise the identification of true positive cases, EPI services require clear entry criteria. Replicating this study in other EPI services with different entry criteria may provide evidence to develop a more uniform screening process. Improved outcomes may be enhanced by measuring effectiveness and liaising with other EPI services.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Australasian Psychiatry
Australasian Psychiatry 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
5.60%
发文量
159
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Australasian Psychiatry is the bi-monthly journal of The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists (RANZCP) that aims to promote the art of psychiatry and its maintenance of excellence in practice. The journal is peer-reviewed and accepts submissions, presented as original research; reviews; descriptions of innovative services; comments on policy, history, politics, economics, training, ethics and the Arts as they relate to mental health and mental health services; statements of opinion and letters. Book reviews are commissioned by the editor. A section of the journal provides information on RANZCP business and related matters.
期刊最新文献
The Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide - brief summary and commentary on the research findings in Volume 7. Australian community and inpatient general public sector mental health services between 2017-18 and 2021-22: Relative stasis in bed capacity, increasing outpatient demand, and stunted expenditure. Oxytocin in old age psychiatry: A systematic review of the safety of using intranasal oxytocin in older adults. Effectiveness of long-acting buprenorphine - A systematic review. Making it real: Actioning the mental health strategy with Pacific Island communities.
×
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