OPEN is a structured intervention program for patients who present with untreated psychosis at an early stage, under the guidance of a case manager and a periodic evaluation performed by a multidisciplinary team.

The aim of the OPEN program is to create an individual care plan, promoting recovery, functionality, quality of life and prevent relapses. One year after implementation of the program, we present the first results.

We performed a retrospective review of the patients’ clinical profiles included in the OPEN program.

Nine patients were included in the program. The most frequent diagnosis was schizophrenia (n=5). By the time of inclusion in the program, 5 patients used cannabis frequently; one patient kept substance use. At the 6th month assessment, 4 in 5 patients showed an improvement in social functioning (Personal and Social Performance Scale; ± 16 points), and a decrease in symptom severity in all (Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale; ± 11 points). Due to COVID-19 pandemics, group interventions were suspended, and some visits were performed by teleconsultation. No patients lost follow-up.

We observed an overall positive result of the first months of this program, regarding both functionality and clinical outcomes. The main obstacle so far is the impossibility of performing group interventions since the start of the contingency measures regarding COVID-19 pandemics. We expect further results of the OPEN program with the inclusion of more patients.

In Ireland, regularly reviewed Individual Care Plans (ICPs) for inpatients at all acute psychiatric inpatient units are a requirement of the Mental Health Act 2001. In this study, we comprehensively evaluated and compared opinions of key stakeholders in relation to the ICP as a care delivery tool.

We employed a descriptive survey design. Questionnaires were distributed to 123 stakeholders (patients and mental health professionals (MHPs)) to evaluate and compare opinions regarding the impact of the ICP in relation to healthcare delivery and health outcomes, and regarding the structure and frequency of use of the ICP.

Ninety-eight stakeholders (80%) completed study questionnaires. Stakeholders (patients (58%) and MHPs (85%)) reported that the ICP assisted in healthcare delivery. However, different attitudes between groups were noted in relation to whether the ICP contributed towards healthcare outcomes, with 64% of patients, but only 41% of MHPs reporting that the ICP positively contributed to mental healthcare outcomes. Some free-text comments described patient dissatisfaction with the role of the ICP for healthcare delivery, and MHP dissatisfaction that the ICP was time-consuming and did not significantly enhance standard patient care.

Whilst the implementation of the ICP is generally viewed positively by both patients and MHPs, considerable dissatisfaction by MHPs was also noted with certain aspects of how the ICP was delivered in practice. Practical adjustments to the implementation of ICP in order to build more positive stakeholder experiences appear warranted and worthy of further research.