Search

Aim: Patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide valuable information and promote shared decision‐making but are infrequently used in psychosis. Self‐rated Health (SRH) and Self‐rated Mental Health (SRMH) are single‐item PROMs in which respondents rate their health and mental health from 'poor' to 'excellent'. We examined the psychometric properties of the SRH and SRMH in early psychosis services in Chennai, India and Montreal, Canada. Methods: Assessments were completed in Tamil/English in Chennai and French/English in Montreal. Test–retest reliability included data from 59 patients in Chennai and Montreal. Criterion validity was examined against clinician‐rated measures of depression, anxiety, positive and negative symptoms, and a quality‐of‐life PROM for 261 patients in Chennai and Montreal. Results: SRH and SRMH had good to excellent test–retest reliability (ICC >0.63) at both sites and in English and Tamil (but not French). Results for criterion validity were mixed. In Montreal, low SRH was associated with not being in positive symptom remission, and poorer functioning and quality of life. SRH was associated only with functioning in Chennai. No associations were found for SRMH in Montreal. In Chennai, low SRMH was associated with not being in positive symptom remission and poorer functioning. Conclusions: Patient‐reported outcome measures may perform differently across contexts as a potential function of variations in sociodemographics, illness characteristics/course, understandings of health/mental health, and so forth. More work is needed to understand if discrepancies between PROMs and CROMs indicate poor validity of PROMs or 'valid' differences between patient and clinician perceptions. Our work suggests that single‐item PROMs can be feasibly integrated into clinical settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Psychiatry is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Aim: Despite their emphasis on engagement, there has been little research on patients' and families' experiences of care in early intervention services for psychosis. We sought to compare patients' and families' experiences of care in two similar early psychosis services in Montreal, Canada and Chennai, India. Because no patient‐ or family‐reported experience measures had been used in a low‐ and middle‐income context, we created a new measure, Show me you care. Here we present its development and psychometric properties. Methods: Show me you care was created based on the literature and stakeholder inputs. Its patient and family versions contain the same nine items (rated on a 7‐point scale) about various supportive behaviours of treatment providers towards patients and families. Patients (N = 293) and families (N = 237) completed the measure in French/English in Montreal and Tamil/English in Chennai. Test–retest reliability, internal consistency, convergent validity, and ease of use were evaluated. Results: Test–retest reliability (intra‐class correlation coefficients) ranged from excellent (0.95) to good (0.66) across the patient and family versions, in Montreal and Chennai, and in English, French, and Tamil. Internal consistency estimates (Cronbach's alphas) were excellent (≥0.87). The measure was reported to be easy to understand and complete. Conclusion: Show me you care fills a gap between principles and practice by making engagement and collaboration as central to measurement in early intervention as it is to its philosophy. Having been co‐designed and developed in three languages and tested in a low‐and‐middle‐income and a high‐income context, our tool has the potential for global application. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To compare social, recreational and independent functioning among persons with psychosis across two geo‐cultural contexts, we adapted the well‐established Social Functioning Scale (SFS) and translated it into French and Tamil. We present the development and psychometric testing of this adaptation, the SFS‐Early Intervention. Methods: Sixteen items were added to reflect contemporary youth activities (e.g., online games) and 31 items adapted to enhance applicability and/or include context‐specific examples (e.g., 'church activity' replaced with 'religious/spiritual activity'). Psychometric properties and participant feedback were evaluated. Results: Test–retest reliability (ICCs) ranged from 0.813 to 0.964. Internal consistency (Cronbach's α) ranged from.749 to.936 across sites and languages. Correlations with original subscales were high. The scale was rated easy to complete and understand. Conclusions: The SFS‐Early Intervention is a promising patient‐reported measure of social, recreational and independent functioning. Our approach shows that conceptually sound existing measures are adaptable to different times and contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]