Kali Brummitt1, Jean Addington. 1. Department of Psychology Hotchkiss Brain Institute, Department of Psychiatry, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. kalibrummitt@hotmail.com
Abstract
AIM: The purpose of this study was to undertake a first step in trying to understand the types of treatments young people at clinical high risk of psychosis are interested in pursuing. METHODS: The sample consisted of 30 young people who were current participants in the ongoing North American Prodrome Longitudinal Study (NAPLS 2) and who met criteria for being at clinical high risk for psychosis. Participants were administered a questionnaire that asked them to identify the types of mental health problems they were currently getting help with or would like to get help with and the types of treatments they thought would be helpful and may be interested in receiving. RESULTS: Results showed that when individuals first began participation in NAPLS, almost half had no expectations for treatment. They wanted help but they did not really know what kind of help to be asking for. Participants had a wide range of concerns for which they wanted help. Although a majority endorsed attenuated positive symptoms as a concern, many other issues such a family and social problems were often identified. For those who were already receiving help, the general opinion was that it was beneficial. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that this population sees many different interventions as being potentially helpful. Furthermore, they are open to participating in a variety of treatments, including psychotherapeutic and psychiatric interventions as well as more general treatments addressing a range of possible deficits or difficulties.
AIM: The purpose of this study was to undertake a first step in trying to understand the types of treatments young people at clinical high risk of psychosis are interested in pursuing. METHODS: The sample consisted of 30 young people who were current participants in the ongoing North American Prodrome Longitudinal Study (NAPLS 2) and who met criteria for being at clinical high risk for psychosis. Participants were administered a questionnaire that asked them to identify the types of mental health problems they were currently getting help with or would like to get help with and the types of treatments they thought would be helpful and may be interested in receiving. RESULTS: Results showed that when individuals first began participation in NAPLS, almost half had no expectations for treatment. They wanted help but they did not really know what kind of help to be asking for. Participants had a wide range of concerns for which they wanted help. Although a majority endorsed attenuated positive symptoms as a concern, many other issues such a family and social problems were often identified. For those who were already receiving help, the general opinion was that it was beneficial. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that this population sees many different interventions as being potentially helpful. Furthermore, they are open to participating in a variety of treatments, including psychotherapeutic and psychiatric interventions as well as more general treatments addressing a range of possible deficits or difficulties.
Authors: Anthony P Morrison; Paul French; Sophie Parker; Morwenna Roberts; Helen Stevens; Richard P Bentall; Shôn W Lewis Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2006-09-14 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Patrick D McGorry; Ian B Hickie; Alison R Yung; Christos Pantelis; Henry J Jackson Journal: Aust N Z J Psychiatry Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 5.744
Authors: Jean Addington; Barbara A Cornblatt; Kristin S Cadenhead; Tyrone D Cannon; Thomas H McGlashan; Diana O Perkins; Larry J Seidman; Ming T Tsuang; Elaine F Walker; Scott W Woods; Robert Heinssen Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2011-04-15 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Thomas H McGlashan; Robert B Zipursky; Diana Perkins; Jean Addington; Tandy Miller; Scott W Woods; Keith A Hawkins; Ralph E Hoffman; Adrian Preda; Irvin Epstein; Donald Addington; Stacy Lindborg; Quynh Trzaskoma; Mauricio Tohen; Alan Breier Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Tandy J Miller; Thomas H McGlashan; Joanna Lifshey Rosen; Lubna Somjee; Philip J Markovich; Kelly Stein; Scott W Woods Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: G Paul Amminger; Miriam R Schäfer; Konstantinos Papageorgiou; Claudia M Klier; Sue M Cotton; Susan M Harrigan; Andrew Mackinnon; Patrick D McGorry; Gregor E Berger Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2010-02
Authors: Anthony P Morrison; Paul French; Lara Walford; Shôn W Lewis; Aoiffe Kilcommons; Joanne Green; Sophie Parker; Richard P Bentall Journal: Br J Psychiatry Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 9.319
Authors: Tyrone D Cannon; Kristin Cadenhead; Barbara Cornblatt; Scott W Woods; Jean Addington; Elaine Walker; Larry J Seidman; Diana Perkins; Ming Tsuang; Thomas McGlashan; Robert Heinssen Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2008-01
Authors: Alison R Yung; Lisa J Phillips; Hok Pan Yuen; Shona M Francey; Colleen A McFarlane; Mats Hallgren; Patrick D McGorry Journal: Schizophr Res Date: 2003-03-01 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Ching-Lun Tsai; Ya-Wen Lin; Hsing-Chi Hsu; Mei-Ling Lou; Hsien-Yuan Lane; Cheng-Hao Tu; Wei-Fen Ma Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-02-18 Impact factor: 3.390