Background Deterioration in general population mental health since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic has been reported, but the impact of the pandemic on people with severe mental illness (SMI) has received less attention. Aims To understand the impact of the early stages of the pandemic on the patients with SMI, in terms of provision of mental health care and patient outcomes. Method We examined records of 34,446 patients with SMI in Oxford Health Foundation Trust between March 2016 and July 2020. We used interrupted time-series analysis to estimate the immediate and subsequent changes in weekly rates of the use of community mental health services, hospitalization, and patient outcomes (as measured by Health of the Nation Outcome Scales, or HoNOS, scores) during the weeks of lockdown between March 23, 2020 and July 3, 2020. Results Mean total HoNOS scores for all patients deteriorated in the weeks subsequent to lockdown (0.060 per week; 95%CI: 0.033, 0.087). Scores for patients with a history of psychosis deteriorated immediately (0.63; 95% CI: 0.26, 1.0). There was an immediate decrease in weekly referrals to community and outpatient services (−196; 95%CI: −300, −91) and no immediate change in weekly inpatient admissions (−4.2; 95%CI: −9.9, 1.5) or weekly total contacts (−26; 95%CI: −475, 423). Conclusions Patients with SMI were negatively impacted during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients with a history of psychosis experienced distinct and immediate impacts. During the same period, referrals to community and outpatient services fell with no consequent impact on inpatient admissions.

No abstract

BackgroundThe components of care delivered by Early Intervention in Psychosis (EIP) services vary, but the impact on patient experience is unknown.ObjectiveTo investigate associations between components of care provided by EIP services in England and patient-reported outcomes.Methods2374 patients from EIP services in England were surveyed during the National Clinical Audit of Psychosis. Participants were asked about the care they received, and completed the ‘Patient Global Impressions’ Scale (rating whether their mental health had improved), and ‘Friends and Family Test’ (rating whether they would recommend their service). Information about service structure was obtained from service providers. We analysed associations between outcomes and components of care using multilevel regression.FindingsThe majority of participants were likely to recommend the treatment they had received (89.8%), and felt that their mental health had improved (89.0%). Participants from services where care coordinators had larger case loads were less likely to recommend their care. Participants were more likely to recommend their care if they had been offered cognitive behavioural therapy for psychosis, family therapy or targeted interventions for carers. Participants were more likely to report that their mental health had improved if they had been offered cognitive behavioural therapy for psychosis or targeted interventions for carers.ConclusionsSpecific components of EIP care were associated with improved patient reported outcomes. Psychosocial interventions and carer support may be particularly important in optimising outcomes for patients.Clinical implicationsThese findings emphasise the need for small case load sizes and comprehensive packages of treatment in EIP services.