The influence of immigrant status and concentration on psychiatric disorder in Canada: a multi-level analysis.

BACKGROUND: Many studies have reported an increased incidence of psychiatric disorder (particularly psychotic disorders) among first generation adult immigrants, along with an increasing risk for ethnic minorities living in low-minority concentration neighborhoods. These studies have depended mostly on European case-based databases. In contrast, North American studies have suggested a lower risk for psychiatric disorder in immigrants, although the effect of neighborhood immigrant concentration has not been studied extensively. METHOD: Using multi-level modeling to disaggregate individual from area-level influences, this study examines the influence of first generation immigrant status at the individual level, immigrant concentration at the neighborhood-level and their combined effect on 12-month prevalence of mood, anxiety and substance-dependence disorders and lifetime prevalence of psychotic disorder, among Canadians. RESULTS: Individual-level data came from the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) 1.2, a cross-sectional study of psychiatric disorder among Canadians over the age of 15 years; the sample for analysis was n=35,708. The CCHS data were linked with neighborhood-level data from the Canadian Census 2001 for multi-level logistic regression. Immigrant status was associated with a lower prevalence of psychiatric disorder, with an added protective effect for immigrants living in neighborhoods with higher immigrant concentrations. Immigrant concentration was not associated with elevated prevalence of psychiatric disorder among non-immigrants. CONCLUSIONS: The finding of lower 12-month prevalence of psychiatric disorder in Canadian immigrants, with further lessening as the neighborhood immigrant concentration increases, reflects a model of person-environment fit, highlighting the importance of studying individual risk factors within environmental contexts.

A multi-site Canadian perspective: examining the functional outcome from first-episode psychosis.

OBJECTIVE: To examine factors contributing to variance in functional outcome in first-episode psychosis (FEP) following 1 year of treatment. METHOD: Naturalistic 1-year follow-up of a FEP cohort (n = 200), from programs in four university centers in Ontario, Canada. Functional recovery was defined by 'Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale' (SOFAS) score>60. Regression analysis examined the contribution of independent variables to variance in functional outcome. RESULTS: Twelve-month outcome measures were available for 76.5% of the original cohort. Of these, 70% reported being in school/work and in satisfactory relationships. The functional recovery rate was 51%, compared to 74% attaining symptomatic remission. The greatest contributors to variance in outcome were ongoing symptoms at 6 months and substance abuse comorbidity. CONCLUSION: After 1 year of treatment, FEP patients show high rates of symptomatic remission and relatively lower rates of functional recovery. Symptoms and substance abuse contribute to variance in outcome.

A systematic review of longitudinal outcome studies of first-episode psychosis.

BACKGROUND: Existing outcome literature has had an over-representation of chronic patients and suggested a progressive course and poor outcome for schizophrenia. The current study aimed to recombine data of samples from longitudinal studies of first-episode psychosis (FEP) to describe outcome and its predictors. METHOD: A literature search (1966-2003) was conducted for prospective studies examining outcome in first-episode non-affective psychosis using the following key words: early, first, incident, episode, admission, contact, psychosis, schizophrenia, psychotic disorders, course, outcome, follow-up, longitudinal, cohort. These were pooled and analyzed using descriptive and regression analyses. RESULTS: Thirty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria, representing 4100 patients with a mean follow-up of 35.1+/-6.0 months. Studies varied in the categories of outcome used, the most common being 'good' (54% of studies) and 'poor' (34% of studies), variably defined. In studies reporting these categories, good outcomes were reported in 42.2% (3.5%) and poor outcomes in 27.1% (2.8%) of cases. Predictors associated with better outcome domains were: combination of pharmacotherapy and psychosocial therapy, lack of epidemiologic representativeness of the sample, and a developing country of origin. Use of typical neuroleptics was associated with worse outcome. Stratification analyses suggested that populations with schizophrenia only, and those with prospective design, were associated with worse outcome domains. CONCLUSIONS: Outcome from FEP may be more favorable than previously reported, and treatment and methodological variables may be important contributors to outcome. Significant heterogeneity in definitions and methodology limited the comparison and pooling of data. A multi-dimensional, globally used definition of outcome is required for future research.

First-episode psychosis: a comparative review of diagnostic evolution and predictive variables in adolescents versus adults.

OBJECTIVE: To review the diagnostic evolution and predictive variables of diagnosis and outcome in first-episode psychosis in adolescents (age 13-19 years) and adults. METHOD: Literature was reviewed through MEDLINE, Psycinfo, and PubMed, and supplemented by selected bibliographies. RESULTS: First-episode psychosis in the adolescent population has greater diagnostic instability than in adults. We identified trends in the predictive variables of diagnosis and outcome: 1) Premorbid adjustment (that is, personality) in adolescents and Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) both before and after first-episode psychosis in adolescents and adults are the best predictors of diagnosis; 2) GAF (before and after) is the best predictor of outcome in both adolescents and adults. CONCLUSION: Adolescent-onset psychosis appears to be in continuity with adult-onset psychosis. The greater diagnostic instability in adolescents and the absence of significant data on predictive variables suggest a need for specialized and continuous care and research in the adolescent population.