To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure email@example.com
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
People with severe mental illness (SMI) have high rates of chronic disease and premature death.
To explore the strength of evidence for interventions to reduce risk of mortality in people with SMI.
In a meta-review of 16 systematic reviews of controlled studies, mortality was the primary outcome (8 reviews). Physiological health measures (body mass index, weight, glucose levels, lipid profiles and blood pressure) were secondary outcomes (14 reviews).
Antipsychotic and antidepressant medications had some protective effect on mortality, subject to treatment adherence. Integrative community care programmes may reduce physical morbidity and excess deaths, but the effective ingredients are unknown. Interventions to improve unhealthy lifestyles and risky behaviours can improve risk factor profiles, but longer follow-up is needed. Preventive interventions and improved medical care for comorbid chronic disease may reduce excess mortality, but data are lacking.
Improved adherence to pharmacological and physical health management guidelines is indicated.
In 2006, Australia introduced new publicly funded psychological services
for people with affective and anxiety disorders (the Better Access
programme). Despite massive uptake, it has been suggested that Better
Access is selectively treating socioeconomically advantaged people,
including some who do not warrant treatment, and people already receiving
To explore potential disparities in Better Access treatment using
epidemiological data from the 2007 National Survey of Mental Health and
Logistic regression analyses examined patterns and correlates of service
use in two populations: people who used the new psychological services in
the previous 12 months; and people with any ICD–10 12-month affective and
anxiety disorder, regardless of service use.
Most (93.2%) Better Access psychological services users had a 12-month
ICD–10 mental disorder or another indicator of treatment need. Better
Access users without affective or anxiety disorders were not more
socioeconomically advantaged, and received less treatment than those with
these disorders. Among the population with affective or anxiety
disorders, non-service users were less likely to have a severe disorder
and more likely to have anxiety disorder, without a comorbid affective
disorder, than Better Access users. Better Access users comprised more
new allied healthcare recipients than other service users. A substantial
minority of non-service users (13.5%) had severe disorders, but most did
not perceive a need for treatment.
Better Access does not appear to be overservicing individuals without
potential need or contributing to social inequalities in mental
healthcare. It appears to be reaching people who have not previously
received psychological care. Treatment rates could be improved for some
people with anxiety disorders.
The aim of the study was to examine treatment for the initial acute phase of first-episode psychosis at the Early Psychosis Prevention and Intervention Centre. Information regarding treatment was collected from file notes for all patients (n=112). For a subsample of patients (n=68), remission of positive psychotic symptoms was assessed using standardised ratings at 3-month follow-up.
Treatment provided was largely in accordance with recommended treatment strategies. The majority (72%) of patients achieved rapid remission of positive symptoms.
Restrictive practices other than in-patient admission, such as in-patient seclusion, police transport or a community treatment order, can be minimised. The use of low-dose antipsychotic medication is an effective treatment strategy for the initial acute phase of first-episode psychosis.
Providing specialised services to individuals experiencing first-episode psychosis (FEP) is a relatively new endeavour.
To overview developing services for newly diagnosed cases of FEP and the context in which they develop.
This paper describes five model multi-element FEP programmes, outlines recent evaluation studies of FEP services, discusses current evidence gaps relating to the evaluation of complex interventions and specific interventions for FEP and illustrates attempts to examine aspects of clinical work practised at the Early Psychosis Prevention and Intervention Centre (EPPIC) in Melbourne, Australia.
Considerable progress has been made in terms of influencing practice in the assessment and treatment of early psychosis.
There is need for quality clinical and research efforts to inform and accelerate progress in this burgeoning field.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.