SynopsisSeveral previous studies have reported increased rates of schizophrenia among Afro-Caribbean immigrants, although doubt has been cast upon the value of case-note diagnoses and retrospective case-finding. A prospective study was therefore undertaken, including all patients of Afro-Caribbean ethnic origin with a first onset psychosis presenting to the psychiatric services from a defined catchment area. Utilizing several diagnostic classifications, rates for schizophrenia were found to be substantially increased in the Afro-Caribbean community, and especially in the ‘second generation’ British born. Mode of onset and symptom profiles of psychoses suggest that atypical syndromes, and by implication ‘misdiagnoses’, do not account for reported higher rates of schizophrenic illness in these patients.

SynopsisForty-two consecutively identified Afro-Caribbean patients with a first episode of psychosis were compared with a similar group of non-Caribbean patients. A number of differences emerged, although the same proportion of patients in each group had symptoms for 6 months or more prior to psychiatric contact. Afro-Caribbean patients showed greater delay in seeking help, more ‘disturbance’ later in the course of their illness and were more likely to be admitted compulsorily. The social geography of the two groups suggests that the high rates of schizophrenia and related psychoses that we previously reported cannot be explained simply by differences in area of residence at the time of presentation.

No abstract

Kreitman (1979) reported that up to one-half of patients given out-patient appointments one week after an episode of deliberate self-harm (DSH) fail to attend, and gave a number of possible explanations for this. Firstly, parasuicide is often the result of a crisis which may have resolved (albeit temporarily) by the end of a further week. Secondly, someone in a state of heightened tension may find one week too long to wait, and may resort to other strategies to deal with his problems. Thirdly, many parasuicides may find a psychiatric label unacceptable in the context of their problems, and fourthly, an appoint ment made for a fixed day and a fixed hour may not fit the need for immediate action which the subjects subculture had inculcated in him as a habit pattern. Morgan et al (1976) reported that up to 40% of their DSH patients either did not attend any appointment or failed to complete their treatment. Two possible explanations for this were that they either felt that they did not need psychiatric treatment, or else believed that psychiatric treatment was not an answer to their problems. Kessel and Lee (1962), probably in line with much psychiatric practice, did not give a follow-up appointment to 40% of their self-poisoners; this was for two reasons. Firstly, these patients did not have a problem for which psychiatric treatment was appropriate and secondly, many of these patients had an entrenched personality disorder, which made it unlikely that psychiatric intervention would be beneficial.

In a study of 98 cases of deliberate self harm, a high correlation was obtained between a diagnosis of Major Depressive Disorder (M.D.D.) and scores on both the Hamilton Rating Scale for depression (HRS) and the Suicide Intent Scale (SIS). There was also a high correlation between HRS and SIS scores. A higher score on HRS and SIS correlated with increasing age, as also did a diagnosis of M.D.D.