Guloksuz Sinan, Pries Lotta-Katrin, Ten Have Margreet, de Graaf Ron, van Dorsselaer Saskia, Klingenberg Boris, Bak Maarten, Lin Bochao D, van Eijk Kristel R, Delespaul Philippe, van Amelsvoort Therese, Luykx Jurjen J, Rutten Bart P F, van Os Jim
Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, School of Mental Health and Neuroscience, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
World Psychiatry. 2020 Jun;19(2):199-205. doi: 10.1002/wps.20755.
The validity and clinical utility of the concept of "clinical high risk" (CHR) for psychosis have so far been investigated only in risk-enriched samples in clinical settings. In this population-based prospective study, we aimed - for the first time - to assess the incidence rate of clinical psychosis and es-timate the population attributable fraction (PAF) of that incidence for preceding psychosis risk states and DSM-IV diagnoses of non-psychotic mental disorders (mood disorders, anxiety disorders, alcohol use disorders, and drug use disorders). All analyses were adjusted for age, gender and education. The incidence rate of clinical psychosis was 63.0 per 100,000 person-years. The mutually-adjusted Cox proportional hazards model indicated that preceding diagnoses of mood disorders (hazard ratio, HR=10.67, 95% CI: 3.12-36.49), psychosis high-risk state (HR=7.86, 95% CI: 2.76-22.42) and drug use disorders (HR=5.33, 95% CI: 1.61-17.64) were associated with an increased risk for clinical psychosis incidence. Of the clinical psychosis incidence in the population, 85.5% (95% CI: 64.6-94.1) was attributable to prior psychopathology, with mood disorders (PAF=66.2, 95% CI: 33.4-82.9), psychosis high-risk state (PAF=36.9, 95% CI: 11.3-55.1), and drug use disorders (PAF=18.7, 95% CI: -0.9 to 34.6) as the most important factors. Although the psychosis high-risk state displayed a high relative risk for clinical psychosis outcome even after adjusting for other psychopathology, the PAF was comparatively low, given the low prevalence of psychosis high-risk states in the population. These findings provide empirical evidence for the "prevention paradox" of targeted CHR early intervention. A comprehensive prevention strategy with a focus on broader psychopathology may be more effective than the current psychosis-focused approach for achieving population-based improvements in prevention of psychotic disorders.
迄今为止,“临床高危”(CHR)这一精神病概念的有效性和临床实用性仅在临床环境中富含风险的样本中进行了研究。在这项基于人群的前瞻性研究中,我们首次旨在评估临床精神病的发病率,并估计该发病率在先前精神病风险状态以及非精神病性精神障碍(情绪障碍、焦虑障碍、酒精使用障碍和药物使用障碍)的DSM-IV诊断中的人群归因分数(PAF)。所有分析均针对年龄、性别和教育程度进行了调整。临床精神病的发病率为每10万人年63.0例。相互调整的Cox比例风险模型表明,先前诊断为情绪障碍(风险比,HR = 10.67,95%置信区间:3.12 - 36.49)、精神病高危状态(HR = 7.86,95%置信区间:2.76 - 22.42)和药物使用障碍(HR = 5.33,95%置信区间:1.61 - 17.64)与临床精神病发病风险增加相关。在人群中的临床精神病发病中,85.5%(95%置信区间:64.6 - 94.1)可归因于先前的精神病理学,其中情绪障碍(PAF = 66.2,95%置信区间:33.4 - 82.9)、精神病高危状态(PAF = 36.9,95%置信区间:11.3 - 55.1)和药物使用障碍(PAF = 18.7,95%置信区间:-0.9至34.6)是最重要的因素。尽管即使在调整了其他精神病理学因素后,精神病高危状态对临床精神病结局仍显示出较高的相对风险,但鉴于人群中精神病高危状态的患病率较低,PAF相对较低。这些发现为有针对性的CHR早期干预的“预防悖论”提供了实证证据。一种以更广泛的精神病理学为重点的综合预防策略可能比当前以精神病为重点的方法在实现基于人群的预防精神障碍改善方面更有效。