P D McGorry1. 1. Department of Psychiatry, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia. mcgorry@ariel.unimelb.edu.au
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the characteristics of schizophrenia relevant to conducting indicated preventive interventions. METHOD: A systematic review of the literature informed by experiences at the Personal Assistance and Crisis Evaluation (PACE) clinic. RESULTS: Primary prevention requires a sophisticated knowledge of key causal risk factors relevant to the expression of a disorder. The causal risk factors most useful from an intervention standpoint may turn out to be somewhat removed from the neurobiology of the disorder and may even be relatively non-specific, so that tackling them could reduce the risks for a range of mental disorders. The frontier for more specific prevention in schizophrenia and related psychosis is currently represented by indicated preventive interventions for subthreshold symptoms. Again, these may be relatively broad spectrum early in the prepsychotic phase but more proximal to onset, greater treatment specificity can be explored. However, this can be viewed more as preventively orientated treatment rather than primary prevention per se. Early detection of first episode psychosis and optimal intensive treatment of first episodes and the critical early years after diagnosis also represent increasingly attractive preventive foci in psychotic disorders. CONCLUSION: As evidence accumulates, implementation of evidence-based practice in real work settings is a major challenge as it is throughout the mental health service system. The momentum of preventively orientated treatment must be maintained through the 2nd National Mental Health Strategy and in the face of recent misleading polemic regarding the treatability of psychotic disorders, especially schizophrenia. The evidence demonstrates that schizophrenia and related disorders have never been more treatable.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the characteristics of schizophrenia relevant to conducting indicated preventive interventions. METHOD: A systematic review of the literature informed by experiences at the Personal Assistance and Crisis Evaluation (PACE) clinic. RESULTS: Primary prevention requires a sophisticated knowledge of key causal risk factors relevant to the expression of a disorder. The causal risk factors most useful from an intervention standpoint may turn out to be somewhat removed from the neurobiology of the disorder and may even be relatively non-specific, so that tackling them could reduce the risks for a range of mental disorders. The frontier for more specific prevention in schizophrenia and related psychosis is currently represented by indicated preventive interventions for subthreshold symptoms. Again, these may be relatively broad spectrum early in the prepsychotic phase but more proximal to onset, greater treatment specificity can be explored. However, this can be viewed more as preventively orientated treatment rather than primary prevention per se. Early detection of first episode psychosis and optimal intensive treatment of first episodes and the critical early years after diagnosis also represent increasingly attractive preventive foci in psychotic disorders. CONCLUSION: As evidence accumulates, implementation of evidence-based practice in real work settings is a major challenge as it is throughout the mental health service system. The momentum of preventively orientated treatment must be maintained through the 2nd National Mental Health Strategy and in the face of recent misleading polemic regarding the treatability of psychotic disorders, especially schizophrenia. The evidence demonstrates that schizophrenia and related disorders have never been more treatable.