Gender-affirming care in the assessment and treatment of psychosis risk: Considering minority stress in current practice and future research.

INTRODUCTION: Although research has documented the marked disparities in rates of psychosis-spectrum diagnoses in various socially marginalized populations, there is limited research addressing the needs of gender expansive individuals in the context of psychosis-spectrum illnesses using a minority stress lens. As clinical high-risk for psychosis (CHR-p) assessment and treatment becomes accessible to increasingly diverse populations, there is a need for clinicians to demonstrate greater clinical competency working with individuals across diverse social backgrounds and identities. METHODS: We examined rates of gender expansive (GE) patients seeking evaluation at an urban-based CHR-p clinic and compared the diagnostic profile of GE individuals to cisgender patients. Post-hoc analyses were conducted on clinical variables with significant differences between the cisgender and GE groups. RESULTS: The proportion of GE patients seeking evaluation increased from 2017 (9.3%) to 2021 (16.7%). Compared to cisgender youth, GE patients had significantly higher depressive, social anxiety, borderline personality disorder symptoms, higher levels of suicidality and non-suicidal self-injurious behaviour, and lower role functioning. Gender identity was predictive of suicidality controlling for social anxiety, borderline symptoms, and role functioning. CONCLUSIONS: We review implications for CHR-p treatment and discuss ways to integrate minority stress theory and gender-affirming practices into coordinated specialty care for CHR-p patients.

Implementing Technologies to Enhance Coordinated Specialty Care Framework: Implementation Outcomes From a Development and Usability Study.

BACKGROUND: Coordinated specialty care (CSC) has demonstrated efficacy in improving outcomes in individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis and individuals with first-episode psychosis. Given the limitations of scalability and staffing needs, the augmentation of services using digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) may be explored to help support CSC service delivery. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aimed to understand the methods to implement and support technology in routine CSC and offered insights from a quality improvement study assessing the implementation outcomes of DMHIs in CSC. METHODS: Patients and clinicians including psychiatrists, therapists, and supported education and employment specialists from a clinical-high-risk-for-psychosis clinic (Center for Early Detection Assessment and Response to Risk [CEDAR]) and a first-episode-psychosis clinic (Advancing Services for Psychosis Integration and Recovery [ASPIRE]) participated in a quality improvement project exploring the feasibility of DMHIs following the Access, Alignment, Connection, Care, and Scalability framework to implement mindLAMP, a flexible and evidenced-based DMHI. Digital navigators were used at each site to assist clinicians and patients in implementing mindLAMP. To explore the differences in implementation outcomes associated with the app format, a menu-style format was delivered at CEDAR, and a modular approach was used at ASPIRE. Qualitative baseline and follow-up data were collected to assess the specific implementation outcomes. RESULTS: In total, 5 patients (ASPIRE: n=3, 60%; CEDAR: n=2, 40%) were included: 3 (60%) White individuals, 2 (40%) male and 2 (40%) female patients, and 1 (20%) transgender man, with a mean age of 19.6 (SD 2.05) years. Implementation outcome data revealed that patients and clinicians demonstrated high accessibility, acceptability, interest, and belief in the sustainability of DMHIs. Clinicians and patients presented a wide range of interest in unique use cases of DMHI in CSC and expressed variable feasibility and appropriateness associated with nuanced barriers and needs. In addition, the results suggest that adoption, penetration, feasibility, and appropriateness outcomes were moderate and might continue to be explored and targeted. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation outcomes from this project suggest the need for a patient- and clinician-centered approach that is guided by digital navigators and provides versatility, autonomy, and structure. Leveraging these insights has the potential to build on growing research regarding the need for versatility, autonomy, digital navigator support, and structured applications. We anticipate that by continuing to research and improve implementation barriers impeding the adoption and penetration of DMHIs in CSC, accessibility and uptake of DMHIs will improve, therefore connecting patients to the demonstrated benefits of technology-augmented care.