Search

Background: There is strong evidence supporting the association between environmental factors and increased risk of non-affective psychotic disorders. However, the use of sound statistical methods to account for spatial variations associated with environmental risk factors, such as urbanicity, migration, or deprivation, is scarce in the literature., Methods: We studied the geographical distribution of non-affective first-episode psychosis (NA-FEP) in a northern region of Spain (Navarra) during a 54-month period considering area-level socioeconomic indicators as putative explanatory variables. We used several Bayesian hierarchical Poisson models to smooth the standardized incidence ratios (SIR). We included neighborhood-level variables in the spatial models as covariates., Results: We identified 430 NA-FEP cases over a 54-month period for a population at risk of 365,213 inhabitants per year. NA-FEP incidence risks showed spatial patterning and a significant ecological association with the migrant population, unemployment, and consumption of anxiolytics and antidepressants. The high-risk areas corresponded mostly to peripheral urban regions; very few basic health sectors of rural areas emerged as high-risk areas in the spatial models with covariates., Discussion: Increased rates of unemployment, the migrant population, and consumption of anxiolytics and antidepressants showed significant associations linked to the spatial-geographic incidence of NA-FEP. These results may allow targeting geographical areas to provide preventive interventions that potentially address modifiable environmental risk factors for NA-FEP. Further investigation is needed to understand the mechanisms underlying the associations between environmental risk factors and the incidence of NA-FEP., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany.)

Background: This study compares the effectiveness of a new early intervention service for firstepisode psychosis (FEP) in patients under conventional treatment. Six primary and 10 secondary outcome measures are used to better characterize the comparative effectiveness between two FEP groups., Methods: This study plans to enroll 250 patients aged 15-55 years with FEP from all inpatient and outpatient mental health services and primary health care from January 2020 until December 2022. The control group will be composed of 130 FEP patients treated in mental health centers in the 2 years prior to the start of PEPsNa (Programa de Primeros Episodios de Psicosis de Navarra). The primary outcome measures are symptomatic remission, functional recovery, personal recovery, cognitive performance, functional capacity in real-world settings, and costs. The secondary outcome measures are duration of untreated psychosis, substance abuse rate, antipsychotic monotherapy, minimal effective dose of antipsychotic drugs, therapeutic alliance, drop-out rate, number of relapses, global mortality and suicidality, resource use, and general satisfaction in the program., Discussion: This study arises from the growing need to broaden the scope of outcome measures in FEP patients and to account for unmet needs of recovery for FEPs. It aims to contribute in the dissemination of the NAVIGATE model in Europe and to provide new evidence of the effectiveness of early intervention services for stakeholders of the National Health Service., (Copyright © 2022 Sociedad Española de Psiquiatría y Salud Mental (SEPSM). Published by Elsevier España S.L.U. All rights reserved.)