Browsing Health and Social Care by Authors
Cost-effectiveness of early intervention services for psychosis and fidelity to national policy implementation guidanceRadhakrishnan, Muralikrishnan; McCrone, Paul; Lafortune, Louise; Everard, Linda; Fowler, David; Amos, Tim; Freemantle, Nick; Singh, Swaran P.; Marshall, Max; Sharma, Vimal; et al. (Wiley, 2017-08-31)Introduction Early Intervention Services (EIS) for psychosis are being implemented, internationally. It is important to learn from established examples and define the components and intensity of services that provide good value for money. This study aims to assess the cost-effectiveness of EIS according to how closely they adhered to the recommendations of the English Department of Health 2001 Policy Implementation Guide (PIG). Methods EIS from the National Eden Study were assessed using a measure of fidelity to the PIG that rated the presence or absence of 64 recommended items relating to team structure and practice. EIS were then classified into three groups: those with fidelity of 75-80 %, 81%-90 %, and 91-95 %. Patient-level resource use and outcomes were measured one year following inception into the service; costs were calculated and combined with quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. Results At a threshold of £20,000 per QALY, the 81-90% fidelity group had a 56.3% likelihood of being the most cost-effective option followed by 75-80% fidelity at 35.8% and 91-95% fidelity group (7.9%). Conclusions The results from England suggest that striving to maximise fidelity may not be warranted, but that dropping below a certain level of fidelity may result in inefficient use of resources.
Lived experiences of negative symptoms in first-episode psychosis: A qualitative secondary analysisGee, Brioney; Hodgekins, Jo; Lavis, Anna; Notley, Caitlin; Birchwood, Max; Everard, Linda; Freemantle, Nick; Jones, Peter B.; Singh, Swaran P.; Amos, Tim; et al. (Wiley, 2018-03-24)
Social recovery therapy in combination with early intervention services for enhancement of social recovery in patients with first-episode psychosis (SUPEREDEN3): a single-blind, randomised controlled trialFowler, David; Hodgekins, Jo; French, Paul; Marshall, Max; Freemantle, Nick; McCrone, Paul; Everard, Linda; Lavis, Anna; Jones, Peter B.; Amos, Tim; et al. (Elsevier, 2017-12-11)Background - Provision of early intervention services has increased the rate of social recovery in patients with first episode psychosis; however, many individuals have continuing severe and persistent problems with social functioning. We aimed to assess the efficacy of early intervention services augmented with social recovery therapy in patients with first-episode psychosis. The primary hypothesis was that social recovery therapy plus early intervention services would lead to improvements in social recovery. Methods - We did this single-blind, phase 2, randomised controlled trial (SUPEREDEN3) at four specialist early intervention services in the UK. We included participants who were aged 16–35 years, had non-affective psychosis, had been clients of early intervention services for 12–30 months, and had persistent and severe social disability, defined as engagement in less than 30 h per week of structured activity. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1), via computer-generated randomisation with permuted blocks (sizes of four to six), to receive social recovery therapy plus early intervention services or early intervention services alone. Randomisation was stratified by sex and recruitment centre (Norfolk, Birmingham, Lancashire, and Sussex). By necessity, participants were not masked to group allocation, but allocation was concealed from outcome assessors. The primary outcome was time spent in structured activity at 9 months, as measured by the Time Use Survey. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN61621571. Findings Between Oct 1, 2012, and June 20, 2014, we randomly assigned 155 participants to receive social recovery therapy plus early intervention services (n=76) or early intervention services alone (n=79); the intention-to-treat population comprised 154 patients. At 9 months, 143 (93%) participants had data for the primary outcome. Social recovery therapy plus early intervention services was associated with an increase in structured activity of 8·1 h (95% CI 2·5–13·6; p=0·0050) compared with early intervention services alone. No adverse events were deemed attributable to study therapy. Interpretation - Our findings show a clinically important benefit of enhanced social recovery on structured activity in patients with first-episode psychosis who received social recovery therapy plus early intervention services. Social recovery therapy might be useful in improving functional outcomes in people with first-episode psychosis, particularly in individuals not motivated to engage in existing psychosocial interventions targeting functioning, or who have comorbid difficulties preventing them from doing so.