Predictors of recovery from psychosis Analyses of clinical and social factors associated with recovery among patients with first-episode psychosis after 5 years.
ABSTRACT This paper aims to investigate the predictors of good outcome after first-episode non-affective psychosis and the clinical and social trajectories of those that recover.
A cohort of 255 patients with first-episode non-affective psychosis was interviewed 5 years after first diagnosis and treatment. Recovery was defined as working or studying, having a GAF-function score of 60 or above, having remission of negative and psychotic symptoms, and not living in a supported housing facility or being hospitalized during the last 2 years before the five-year follow-up interview.
A total of 40 (15.7%) were found to be recovered, and 76 (29.8%) had a job or were studying after 5 years. Of those working, as many as 20 still had psychotic symptoms. Also notable is that out of the 40 recovered, less than half were recovered after 2 years. Recovery after 5 years was predicted by female sex (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.0-5.8), higher age (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.83-0.99), pre-morbid social adaptation (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.56-0.93), growing up with both parents (OR 2.6, 95% CI 1.0-6.8) and low level of negative symptoms (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.77) at baseline.
Our findings suggest that a stable social life with normal social functioning has a predictive value for good outcome. These measures might be influenced by negative symptoms, but in the multivariate analysis with negative symptoms included they have an independent effect. Also our findings suggest that, after first-episode psychosis, some patients can still experience psychotic symptoms, but have a job and a fairly stable life.
- SourceAvailable from: Stephen F AustinCognitive Therapy and Research 02/2015; 39(1):61-69. DOI:10.1007/s10608-014-9633-9 · 1.70 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Understanding the longitudinal course of negative symptoms, especially in relationship to functioning, in the early phase of schizophrenia is crucial to developing intervention approaches. The course of negative symptoms and daily functioning was examined over a 1-year period following a recent onset of schizophrenia and at an 8-year follow-up point. The study included 149 recent-onset schizophrenia patients who had a mean age of 23.7 (SD=4.4)years and mean education of 12.9 (SD=2.2)years. Negative symptom (BPRS and SANS) and functional outcome (SCORS) assessments were conducted frequently by trained raters. After antipsychotic medication stabilization, negative symptoms during the first outpatient year were moderately stable (BPRS ICC=0.64 and SANS ICC=0.66). Despite this overall moderate stability, 24% of patients experienced at least one period of negative symptoms exacerbation. Furthermore, entry level of negative symptoms was significantly associated with poor social functioning (r=-.34, p<.01) and work/school functioning (r=-.25, p<.05) at 12months, and with negative symptoms at the 8-year follow-up (r=.29, p<.05). Early negative symptoms are fairly stable during the first outpatient year, are predictors of daily functioning at 12months, and predict negative symptoms 8years later. Despite the high levels of stability, negative symptoms did fluctuate in a subsample of patients. These findings suggest that negative symptoms may be an important early course target for intervention aimed at promoting recovery. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.Schizophrenia Research 12/2014; 161(2-3). DOI:10.1016/j.schres.2014.10.043 · 4.43 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: More mental health services are adopting the recovery paradigm. This study adds to prior research by (a) using measures of stages of recovery and elements of recovery that were designed and validated in a non-Western, Chinese culture and (b) testing which demographic factors predict advanced recovery and whether placing importance on certain elements predicts advanced recovery.International Journal of Social Psychiatry 05/2014; 61(1). DOI:10.1177/0020764014535756 · 1.15 Impact Factor