Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T20:47:44.109Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

When things are not as they seem: detecting first-episode psychosis upon referral to ultrahigh-risk (‘prodromal’) clinics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 June 2014

B Nelson
Affiliation:
ORYGEN Research Centre
A Yung
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Abstracts from ‘Brainwaves’— The Australasian Society for Psychiatric Research Annual Meeting 2006, 6–8 December, Sydney, Australia
Copyright
Copyright © 2006 Blackwell Munksgaard

Background:

There are two main targets for intervention during the prodromal phase: 1) current symptoms, behaviour or disability and 2) prevention of onset of frank psychotic disorder. The current presentation examines a ‘third’ function of ‘ultrahigh-risk’ (UHR) clinics: to detect first-episode psychosis (FEP) mistakenly identified as a prodrome.

Methods:

A clinical audit was conducted of referrals to a UHR service, the Personal Assessment and Crisis Evaluation (PACE) clinic, over a 12-month period (April 2005 to March 2006) to establish the proportion who were psychotic on referral.

Results:

The PACE clinic received 149 referrals over the period examined. About 11.4% of the total number of referrals and 12.6% of those who attended a first appointment were psychotic on referral.

Conclusions:

These figures indicate that a substantial proportion of individuals thought to be prodromal are in fact suffering FEP. It is suggested that by detecting these individuals and commencing treatment, UHR clinics minimize duration of untreated psychosis for patients with FEP mistaken as prodromal.