Orygen Youth Health Research Centre, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2010 Jul;44(7):625-30. doi: 10.3109/00048671003620210.
Criteria for identifying people likely to develop a first psychotic episode are now used in many clinical services worldwide. In recent years within these services, there has been an increase in the practice of prescribing antipsychotic medication with the aim of reducing symptoms and preventing onset of full-blown disorder. This practice is based on clinical impression of an incipient psychosis, that is, a clinical judgment that a particular patient may soon progress to full-threshold disorder and may therefore benefit from antipsychotics. However, it is unclear how accurate this clinical impression is. If not accurate it could mean that individuals are receiving antipsychotics unnecessarily. In this study, we investigated the predictive validity of clinical impression of whether ultra high risk patients would develop frank psychosis.
Experienced psychologists rated their clinical impression of incipient psychosis in 168 ultra high risk patients. Ratings were made upon entry to the PACE clinic, a clinical service for ultra high risk patients. Psychosis status over the subsequent 12-month period was established using the Comprehensive Assessment of At Risk Mental States or State medical records.
A total of 8.9% of the sample transitioned to psychosis over the 12-month follow-up period. There was a sensitivity of 0.80, specificity of 0.84, positive predictive value (PPV) of 0.32 and negative predictive value (NPV) of 0.98 for the prediction of psychosis using the clinical impression ratings.
The results indicate that clinical impression is not sufficient for predicting psychosis outcome in ultra high risk cohorts and that ongoing rigorous research into predictors of outcome in such cohorts is required. The results also caution against the prescription of antipsychotic medication based on clinical impression of incipient psychosis. Future work should address the predictive validity of clinical impression with a larger sample and over a longer follow-up period.
目前,世界上许多临床服务机构都使用识别可能出现首发精神病发作的人的标准。近年来,这些服务机构中增加了一种做法,即开具抗精神病药物,以减轻症状并预防全面发病。这种做法基于对初期精神病的临床印象,也就是说,临床判断某个特定患者可能很快发展为全面障碍,因此可能受益于抗精神病药物。然而,这种临床印象的准确性尚不清楚。如果不准确,就意味着有些人可能不必要地接受了抗精神病药物治疗。在这项研究中,我们调查了临床医生对超高危患者是否会出现明显精神病的临床印象的预测准确性。
经验丰富的心理学家对 168 名超高危患者的初期精神病临床印象进行了评估。评估是在进入 PACE 诊所时进行的,PACE 诊所是为超高危患者提供的临床服务。在接下来的 12 个月中,通过使用《风险精神状态综合评估》或州医疗记录来确定精神病状态。
在 12 个月的随访期间,共有 8.9%的样本发展为精神病。使用临床印象评分预测精神病的结果,灵敏度为 0.80,特异性为 0.84,阳性预测值(PPV)为 0.32,阴性预测值(NPV)为 0.98。
结果表明,临床印象不足以预测超高危人群的精神病结局,需要对这类人群的结局预测因素进行持续严格的研究。结果还告诫不要根据初期精神病的临床印象开抗精神病药物。未来的工作应该用更大的样本和更长的随访时间来评估临床印象的预测准确性。