Background Over the last decades, many high-income countries have successfully implemented assertive outreach mental health services for acute care. Despite evidence that these services entail several benefits for service users, Germany has lagged behind and has been slow in implementing outreach services. In 2018, a new law enabled national mental health care providers to implement team-based crisis intervention services on a regular basis, allowing for different forms of Inpatient Equivalent Home Treatment (IEHT). IEHT is similar to the internationally known Home Treatment or Crisis Resolution Teams. It provides acute psychiatric treatment at the user’s home, similar to inpatient hospital treatment in terms of content, flexibility, and complexity. Methods/design The presented naturalistic, quasi-experimental cohort study will evaluate IEHT in ten hospitals running IEHT services in different German regions. Within a multi-method research approach, it will evaluate stakeholders’ experiences of care, service use, efficacy, costs, treatment processes and implementation processes of IEHT from different perspectives. Quantitative surveys will be used to recruit 360 service users. Subsequently, 180 service users receiving IEHT will be compared with 180 matched statistical ‘twins’ receiving standard inpatient treatment. Assessments will take place at baseline as well as after 6 and 12 months. The primary outcome is the hospital re-admission rate within 12 months. Secondary outcomes include the combined readmission rate, total number of inpatient hospital days, treatment discontinuation rate, quality of life, psycho-social functioning, job integration, recovery, satisfaction with care, shared decision-making, and treatment costs. Additionally, the study will assess the burden of care and satisfaction with care among relatives or informal caregivers. A collaborative research team made up of researchers with and without lived experience of mental distress will conduct qualitative investigations with service users, caregivers and IEHT staff teams to explore critical ingredients and interactions between implementation processes, treatment processes, and outcomes from a stakeholder perspective. Discussion By integrating outcome, process and implementation research as well as different stakeholder perspectives and experiences in one study, this trial captures the various facets of IEHT as a special form of home treatment. Therefore, it allows for an adequate, comprehensive evaluation on different levels of this complex intervention. Trial registration Trial registrations: 1) German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS), DRKS000224769. Registered December 3rd 2020, https://www.drks.de/drks_web/setLocale_EN.do; 2) ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT0474550. Registered February 9th 2021.
There is conceptual overlap between negative and depressive symptoms: Mainly the ‘avolition’ factor of negative symptoms also encompasses main symptoms of depression. However, whereas in depression mood is low, mainly anticipatory anhedonia can be found in negative symptoms. Moreover, patients with schizophrenia (SCZ) show greater expressive deficits than those with Major Depressive Episode (MDE). We investigated if measures of depressive and negative symptoms differentiate SCZ subjects, subjects with MDE, and healthy controls (HC). 21 SCZ, 22 MDE, and 25 HC subjects were examined with a rater assessment and a self-rating for negative symptoms (Clinical Assessment Interview for Negative Symptoms (CAINS); Motivation and Pleasure – Self-Report (MAP-SR)) and depressive symptoms (Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD-17); Beck Depression Inventory (BDI)). All measures differentiated the psychiatric samples from HC (all p’s < 0.01). The ratings of depressive symptoms (HAMD-17, BDI) and rater assessment of negative symptoms (CAINS) – specifically its sub scale measuring expressive deficits – managed to discriminate between subjects with schizophrenia and those with MDE (SCZ > MDE > HC for negative, MDE > SCZ > HC for depressive symptoms, all p’s < 0.05). The self-rating of negative symptoms (MAP-SR) did not. To differentiate negative symptoms and depression clinicians might look for (self-)reported low mood and observer-rated reduction in speech as well as in gestures and facial expression. Reduced expression and moderate levels of depression point towards a negative syndrome, whereas mostly unimpaired expression and high scores of self-reported depressive symptoms are more likely to indicate a depressive syndrome.
In current international classification systems (ICD-10, DSM5), the diagnostic criteria for psychotic disorders (e.g. schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder) are based on symptomatic descriptions since no unambiguous biomarkers are known to date. However, when underlying causes of psychotic symptoms, like inflammation, ischemia, or tumor affecting the neural tissue can be identified, a different classification is used ("psychotic disorder with delusions due to known physiological condition" (ICD-10: F06.2) or psychosis caused by medical factors (DSM5)). While CSF analysis still is considered optional in current diagnostic guidelines for psychotic disorders, CSF biomarkers could help to identify known physiological conditions. In this retrospective, partly descriptive analysis of 144 patients with psychotic symptoms and available CSF data, we analyzed CSF examinations' significance to differentiate patients with specific etiological factors (F06.2) from patients with schizophrenia, schizotypal, delusional, and other non-mood psychotic disorders (F2). In 40.3% of all patients, at least one CSF parameter was out of the reference range. Abnormal CSF-findings were found significantly more often in patients diagnosed with F06.2 (88.2%) as compared to patients diagnosed with F2 (23.8%, p < 0.00001). A total of 17 cases were identified as probably caused by specific etiological factors (F06.2), of which ten cases fulfilled the criteria for a probable autoimmune psychosis linked to the following autoantibodies: amphiphysin, CASPR2, CV2, LGl1, NMDA, zic4, and titin. Two cases presented with anti-thyroid tissue autoantibodies. In four cases, further probable causal factors were identified: COVID-19, a frontal intracranial tumor, multiple sclerosis (n = 2), and neurosyphilis. Twenty-one cases remained with "no reliable diagnostic classification". Age at onset of psychotic symptoms differed between patients diagnosed with F2 and F06.2 (p = 0.014), with the latter group being older (median: 44 vs. 28 years). Various CSF parameters were analyzed in an exploratory analysis, identifying pleocytosis and oligoclonal bands (OCBs) as discriminators (F06.2 vs. F2) with a high specificity of > 96% each. No group differences were found for gender, characteristics of psychotic symptoms, substance dependency, or family history. This study emphasizes the great importance of a detailed diagnostic workup in diagnosing psychotic disorders, including CSF analysis, to detect possible underlying pathologies and improve treatment decisions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.