Early detection and integrated care for adolescents and young adults with psychotic disorders: the ACCESS III study.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to investigate whether a combined intervention composed of early detection plus integrated care (EDIC) enhances outcomes in patients with early psychosis compared to standard care (SC). METHODS: ACCESS III is a prospective non-randomized historical control design 1-year study examining the efficacy of EDIC (n = 120) vs. SC (n = 105) in patients aged 12-29 years. Primary outcome was the rate of ≥6 months combined symptomatic and functional remission. Additional outcomes comprised the reduction of DUP and course of psychopathology, functioning, quality of life, and satisfaction with care. RESULTS: In observed cases, 48.9% in the EDIC and 15.2% in the SC group reached the primary endpoint. Remission was predicted by EDIC (OR = 6.8, CI: 3.15-14.53, P < 0.001); younger age predicted non-remission (OR = 1.1, CI: 1.01-1.19, P = 0.038). Linear regressions indicated a reduction of DUP in EDIC (P < 0.001), but not in SC (P = 0.41). MMRMs showed significantly larger improvements in PANSS positive (P < 0.001) and GAF (P < 0.01) scores in EDIC vs. SC, and in EDIC over time in CGI-Severity (P < 0.001) and numerically in Q-LES-Q-18 (P = 0.052). CONCLUSIONS: EDIC lead to significantly higher proportions of patients achieving combined remission. Moderating variables included a reduction of DUP and EDIC, offering psychotherapeutic interventions.

Pharmacotherapy in Children and Adolescents at Clinical-High Risk for Psychosis and Bipolar Disorder.

This review aims to describe the importance of i) detecting individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis (schizophrenia) or bipolar disorder, especially in children and adolescents, in order to enable early intervention, and ii) evaluating different intervention strategies, especially pharmacotherapy, during the subsyndromal or "prodromal" stages of these severe and often debilitating disorders. The different approaches regarding the psychotic and bipolar clinical high-risk state are discussed, including reasons and evidence for early (pharmacological) intervention and risks of treatment vs. non-treatment. Only 10 prospective studies of antipsychotics (randomized=4) and 6 prospective studies of non-antipsychotic pharmacologic agents (randomized=3, i. e., omega-3 fatty acids=2, glycine=1) for the psychotic clinical high-risk state and only 4 prospective studies of mood stabilizing medications for the bipolar clinical high-risk state (randomized=2, i. e., lithium=1, valproate=1) were detected. Based on the minimal efficacy data, adverse effect risks, especially in pediatric populations, nonspecific psychopathology, and unknown true risk for the development of either psychosis or bipolar disorder or of chronically disabling symptoms and disability, medication treatment currently remains second choice after psychosocial intervention. Additional research in this area is clearly needed in order to shed more light on the relevance and predictive value of potentially prodromal symptoms, their identification and most appropriate management options.