Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T21:40:37.525Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Letter to the Editor: Mind the translation gap: problems in the implementation of early intervention services

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 September 2009

Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Correspondence
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

In recent years there have been calls for a paradigm shift in psychiatry from treating established illnesses towards early and preventive intervention (McGorry & Killackey, Reference McGorry and Killackey2002). These calls have been associated with the development and proliferation of services providing early and preventive intervention for psychosis (Lester et al. Reference Lester, Birchwood, Bryan, England, Rogers and Sirvastava2009). However, it is often not appreciated that this is not a new approach: it was proposed at least 100 years ago (Maudsley, Reference Maudsley1909). In his paper published in 1909 Maudsley outlined the need for psychiatric services to focus on treating people early in their illnesses because this is when he thought there was the best chance of recovery and cure, stating: ‘the right treatment is to stop the beginnings of mischief’ and ‘early treatment … will prevent the necessity … of placing some patients in a lunatic asylum’ (Maudsley, Reference Maudsley1909). In the last 100 years considerable evidence has accrued indicating that he was right – early and preventive intervention is associated with better outcomes and reduced admission rates (for review see McGorry, Reference McGorry2005). However, there appears to be a gap in translation: many health services have implemented cheaper hybrid and hub-and-spoke models rather than the comprehensive stand-alone early intervention team structures evaluated in the evidence base (Lester et al. Reference Lester, Birchwood, Bryan, England, Rogers and Sirvastava2009). The study by Valmaggia et al. (Reference Valmaggia, McCrone, Knapp, Woolley, Broome, Tabraham, Johns, Prescott, Bramon, Lappin, Power and McGuire2009) is striking in providing evidence that better outcomes can also be cost effective. We hope that health-care commissioners take note that this was achieved with a comprehensive stand-alone team (Valmaggia et al. Reference Valmaggia, McCrone, Knapp, Woolley, Broome, Tabraham, Johns, Prescott, Bramon, Lappin, Power and McGuire2009). Other team structures may not be as effective – a cheaper service may cost more in the long run. Hopefully it will not take another 100 years for the funding to follow the evidence.

Declaration of Interest

Dr Howes works in the OASIS service providing preventive intervention for people at clinical risk of psychosis.

References

Lester, H, Birchwood, M, Bryan, S, England, E, Rogers, H, Sirvastava, N (2009). Development and implementation of early intervention services for young people with psychosis: case study. British Journal of Psychiatry 194, 446450.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maudsley, H (1909). A mental hospital – its aims and uses. Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry 13, 112.Google Scholar
McGorry, PD (2005). Early intervention in psychotic disorders: beyond debate to solving problems. British Journal of Psychiatry (Suppl.) 48, s108s110.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McGorry, PD, Killackey, EJ (2002). Early intervention in psychosis: a new evidence based paradigm. Epidemiologia e Psichiatria Sociale 11, 237247.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Valmaggia, LR, McCrone, P, Knapp, M, Woolley, JB, Broome, MR, Tabraham, P, Johns, LC, Prescott, C, Bramon, E, Lappin, J, Power, P, McGuire, PK (2009). Economic impact of early intervention in people at high risk of psychosis. Psychological Medicine. Published online: 9 April 2009. doi: 10.1017/S0033291709005613.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed