Search

Aims: Criteria for identifying people likely to develop a first psychotic episode are now used in many clinical services worldwide. In recent years within these services, there has been an increase in the practice of prescribing antipsychotic medication with the aim of reducing symptoms and preventing onset of full-blown disorder. This practice is based on clinical impression of an incipient psychosis, that is, a clinical judgment that a particular patient may soon progress to full-threshold disorder and may therefore benefit from antipsychotics. However, it is unclear how accurate this clinical impression is. If not accurate it could mean that individuals are receiving antipsychotics unnecessarily. In this study, we investigated the predictive validity of clinical impression of whether ultra high risk patients would develop frank psychosis. Methods: Experienced psychologists rated their clinical impression of incipient psychosis in 168 ultra high risk patients. Ratings were made upon entry to the PACE clinic, a clinical service for ultra high risk patients. Psychosis status over the subsequent 12-month period was established using the Comprehensive Assessment of At Risk Mental States or State medical records. Results: A total of 8.9% of the sample transitioned to psychosis over the 12-month follow-up period. There was a sensitivity of 0.80, specificity of 0.84, positive predictive value (PPV) of 0.32 and negative predictive value (NPV) of 0.98 for the prediction of psychosis using the clinical impression ratings. Conclusions: The results indicate that clinical impression is not sufficient for predicting psychosis outcome in ultra high risk cohorts and that ongoing rigorous research into predictors of outcome in such cohorts is required. The results also caution against the prescription of antipsychotic medication based on clinical impression of incipient psychosis. Future work should address the predictive validity of clinical impression with a larger sample and over a longer follow-up period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Recognizing the prodrome of a first psychotic episode prospectively creates the opportunity of intervention, which could delay, ameliorate or even prevent onset. Valid criteria and a reliable methodology for identifying possible prodromes are needed. This paper describes an instrument, the Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States (CAARMS), which has been designed for such a purpose. It has two functions: (i) to assess psychopathology thought to indicate imminent development of a first-episode psychotic disorder; and (ii) to determine if an individual meets criteria for being at ultra high risk (UHR) for onset of first psychotic disorder. This paper describes the pilot evaluation of the CAARMS. Method: Several methodologies were used to test the CAARMS. First, CAARMS scores in a group of UHR young people and the association between CAARMS scores and the risk of transition to psychotic disorder, were analysed. Second, CAARMS scores in a UHR group were compared to a control group. To assess concurrent validity, CAARMS-defined UHR criteria were compared to the existing criteria for identifying the UHR cohort. To assess predictive validity, the CAARMS-defined UHR criteria were applied to a sample of 150 non-psychotic help-seekers and rates of onset of psychotic disorder at 6-month follow-up determined for the CAARMS-positive (i.e. met UHR criteria) group and the CAARMS-negative (i.e. did not meet UHR criteria) group. The inter-rater reliability of the CAARMS was assessed by using pairs of raters. Results: High CAARMS score in the UHR group was significantly associated with onset of psychotic disorder. The control group had significantly lower CAARMS scores than the UHR group. The UHR criteria assessed by the CAARMS identified a similar group to the criteria measured by existing methodology. In the sample of non-psychotic help-seekers those who were CAARMS-positive were at significantly increased risk of onset of psychotic disorder compared to those who were CAARMS-negative (relative risk of 12.44 (95% CI = 1.5–103.41, p = 0.0025)). The CAARMS had good to excellent reliability. Conclusions: In these preliminary investigations, the CAARMS displayed good to excellent concurrent, discriminant and predictive validity and excellent inter-rater reliability. The CAARMS instrument provides a useful platform for monitoring subthreshold psychotic symptoms for worsening into full-threshold psychotic disorder. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective : An association between birth and pregnancy complications and the later development of schizophrenia has been described for decades and obstetric complications (OCs) have been proposed as a vulnerability marker for psychosis in line with the neurodevelopmental hypothesis of psychotic disorders. Previous studies of OCs have focused on established schizophrenia. In this study, the association between OCs and the development of psychotic disorder was studied in a group of 74 young people identified as being at very high risk for the first onset of psychosis. Method : The‘ultra’ high risk (UHR) cohort was identified by the presence of subthreshold psychotic symptoms, or a combination of first-degree relative with a psychotic disorder and recent functional decline. Thirty-eight per cent of the cohort developed an acute psychotic episode over the 12-month period after recruitment. As a component of a larger research study, the level of OCs experienced by the UHR cohort was assessed at intake. Results : Obstetric complications were not associated with the later development of psychosis in the UHR group included in this study. Conclusions : This study does not support a role for OCs as a risk factor for the later development of psychosis; however, we cannot conclude that they should be completely ignored as a candidate risk factor for onset of psychosis. A number of weaknesses of the study suggest that it may be premature to dismiss OCs as a risk factor for the development of psychosis and further research is urged in this area. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 2005; 39:460–466 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]