Consumer choices about mental health support services

 The implications of psychosocial disability being included in the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) are not yet fully understood. It is anticipated that approximately 57,000 people with continuous and enduring psychosocial disability across Australia will be eligible for support under Tier 3 of the NDIS. They will be able to make choices about the supports that are “reasonable and necessary” to meet their needs. While there is some work currently being undertaken to prepare staff in the sector for the change, until now there have been few projects focused on the implications of the NDIS from the perspective of people with psychosocial disability.In response Mind Australia has funded an innovative research project that has sought to:• provide the CMMHSS and other stakeholders with an understanding of support needs and preferences of people with psychosocial disability and the types of changes needed to develop more responsive services in the transition to NDIS.• give people with psychosocial disability the opportunity to have a voice in stating their preferences for support

People making choices: the support needs and preferences of people with psychosocial disability: project summary

The aim of this project was to improve understanding of the choices that people with psychosocial disability would make about support for priority life goals if they were offered individualised funding packages. This was timely given the inclusion of psychosocial disability in the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), which has been designed to enable Australians with disability the opportunity to exercise choice and control in the pursuit of their goals and the planning and delivery of their supports (Commonwealth of Australia, 2013b).

Study protocol: The development of a pilot study employing a randomised controlled design to investigate the feasibility and effects of a peer support program following discharge from a specialist first-episode psychosis treatment centre

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Young people with first-episode psychosis (FEP) are at risk of a range of negative outcomes. Specialist FEP services have been developed to provide comprehensive, multi-disciplinary treatment. However, these services are often available for a restricted period and the services that young people may be transferred to are less comprehensive. This represents a risk of drop out from treatment services in a group already considered to be at risk of disengagement. Peer support groups have been shown to improve social relationships among people with psychosis however individual peer support programs have not been tested on young people with first-episode psychosis; nor have they been tested at the point of discharge from services.</p> <p>Methods/design</p> <p>The study is an 18-month randomised controlled trial being conducted at Orygen Youth Health Research Centre in Melbourne, Australia. The aim of the study is to test the feasibility and effects of a 6-month peer support intervention delivered to young people with FEP over the period of discharge. Participants are young people aged 15-24 who are being discharged from a specialist first-episode psychosis treatment centre. There is a 6-month recruitment period. The intervention comprises two hours of contact per fortnight during which peer support workers can assist participants to engage with their new services, or other social and community activities. Participants will be assessed at baseline and post intervention (6 months).</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This paper describes the development of a randomised-controlled trial which aims to pilot a peer support program among young people who are being discharged from a specialist FEP treatment centre. If effective, the intervention could lead to benefits not only for participants over the discharge period, but for peer support workers as well.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>The study was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry; number: ACTRN12610000241033.</p

The PULSAR Specialist Care protocol: a stepped-wedge cluster randomized control trial a training intervention for community mental health teams in recovery-oriented practice

Background: Recovery features strongly in Australian mental health policy; however, evidence is limited for the efficacy of recovery-oriented practice at the service level. This paper describes the Principles Unite Local Services Assisting Recovery (PULSAR) Specialist Care trial protocol for a recovery-oriented practice training intervention delivered to specialist mental health services staff. The primary aim is to evaluate whether adult consumers accessing services where staff have received the intervention report superior recovery outcomes compared to adult consumers accessing services where staff have not yet received the intervention. A qualitative sub-study aims to examine staff and consumer views on implementing recovery-oriented practice. A process evaluation sub-study aims to articulate important explanatory variables affecting the interventions rollout and outcomes. Methods: The mixed methods design incorporates a two-step stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT) examining cross-sectional data from three phases, and nested qualitative and process evaluation sub-studies. Participating specialist mental health care services in Melbourne, Victoria are divided into 14 clusters with half randomly allocated to receive the staff training in year one and half in year two. Research participants are consumers aged 18-75 years who attended the cluster within a previous three-month period either at baseline, 12 (step 1) or 24 months (step 2). In the two nested sub-studies, participation extends to cluster staff. The primary outcome is the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery collected from 756 consumers (252 each at baseline, step 1, step 2). Secondary and other outcomes measuring well-being, service satisfaction and health economic impact are collected from a subset of 252 consumers (63 at baseline; 126 at step 1; 63 at step 2) via interviews. Interview based longitudinal data are also collected 12 months apart from 88 consumers with a psychotic disorder diagnosis (44 at baseline, step 1; 44 at step 1, step 2). cRCT data will be analyzed using multilevel mixed-effects modelling to account for clustering and some repeated measures, supplemented by thematic analysis of qualitative interview data. The process evaluation will draw on qualitative, quantitative and documentary data. Discussion: Findings will provide an evidence-base for the continued transformation of Australian mental health service frameworks toward recovery

Does specific psychopathology predict development of psychosis in ultra high-risk (UHR) patients?

Objectives Studies have attempted to identify additional risk factors within the group identified as 'ultra high risk' (UHR) for developing psychotic disorders in order to characterise those at highest risk. However, these studies have often neglected clinical symptom types as additional risk factors. We aimed to investigate the relationship between baseline clinical psychotic or psychotic-like symptoms and the subsequent transition to a psychotic disorder in a UHR sample. Method A retrospective 'case-control' methodology was used. We identified all individuals from a UHR clinic who had subsequently developed a psychotic disorder (cases) and compared these to a random sample of individuals from the clinic who did not become psychotic within the sampling time frame (controls). The sample consisted of 120 patients (60 cases, 60 controls). An audit tool was used to identify clinical symptoms reported at entry to the clinic (baseline) using the clinical file. Diagnosis at transition was assessed using the Operational Criteria for Psychotic Illness (OPCRIT) computer program. The relationship between transition to a psychotic disorder and baseline symptoms was explored using survival analysis. Results Presence of thought disorder, any delusions and elevated mood significantly predicted transition to a psychotic disorder. When other symptoms were adjusted for, only the presence of elevated mood significantly predicted subsequent transition (hazard ratio 2.69, p = 0.002). Thought disorder was a predictor of transition to a schizophrenia-like psychotic disorder (hazard ratio 3.69, p = 0.008). Conclusions Few individual clinical symptoms appear to be predictive of transition to a psychotic disorder in the UHR group. Clinicians should be cautious about the use of clinical profile alone in such individuals when determining who is at highest risk

Intelligence trajectories in individuals at ultra-high risk for psychosis: An 8-year longitudinal analysis

Background: Cognitive impairment is a well-documented predictor of transition to a full-threshold psychotic disorder amongst individuals at ultra-high risk (UHR) for psychosis. However, less is known about whether change in cognitive functioning differs between those who do and do not transition to a psychotic disorder. Studies to date have not examined trajectories in intelligence constructs (e.g., acquired knowledge and fluid intelligence), which have demonstrated marked impairments in individuals with schizophrenia. This study aimed to examine intelligence trajectories using longitudinal data from three time-points, spanning an average of eight years. Methods: Participants (N=139) at UHR for psychosis completed the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI) at each follow-up. Linear mixed-effects models mapped changes in WASI Full-Scale IQ (FSIQ) and T-scores on Vocabulary, Similarities, Block Design, and Matrix Reasoning subtests. Results: The sample showed stable and improving trajectories for FSIQ and all subtests. There were no significant differences in trajectories between those who did and did not transition to psychosis and between individuals with good and poor functional outcomes. However, although not significant, the trajectories of the acquired knowledge subtests diverged between transitioned and non-transitioned individuals (β=−0.12, 95% CI [−0.29, 0.05] for Vocabulary and β=−0.14, 95% CI [−0.33, 0.05] for Similarities). Conclusions: There was no evidence for long-term deterioration in intelligence trajectories in this UHR sample. As the small sample of individuals who transitioned may have limited our ability to detect subtle differences, future studies with larger sample sizes are needed to explore potential differences in intelligence trajectories between UHR transition groups