Structural Disadvantage and Culture, Race, and Ethnicity in Early Psychosis Services: International Provider Survey.

OBJECTIVE

Little is known about provider perspectives on programmatic responses to structural disadvantage and cultural differences within early intervention in psychosis (EIP) services, programs, and models. The primary objective of this study was to investigate providers' perspectives on the impacts of disadvantage and minority race, ethnicity, and culture and to describe current practices and perceived gaps and concerns.

METHODS

An online survey of specialized EIP providers was disseminated in the United Kingdom, United States, Canada, Australia, and Chile. A total of 164 providers, representing 110 unique sites, completed the survey. Closed-ended questions gathered demographic and program data, including information on formal assessment of trauma or adversity, integration of trauma-informed care, integration of formal cultural assessment tools, training focused on culture, programmatic changes to address culture-related issues, and consultation with cultural insiders. Open-ended questions addressed the demographic mix of the program's client population; the perceived role and influence of trauma, structural disadvantage, and cultural differences; and concerns and needs related to these topics. Frequencies were examined for closed-ended items; open-ended responses were systematically coded.

RESULTS

Overall, survey findings suggested low levels of implementation of a variety of assessment and support practices related to cultural diversity in EIP programs. Coding of open-ended responses revealed numerous concerns regarding the impacts of disadvantage and cultural difference on clients and perceived gaps in policy and implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

An expansion of research and service development aimed at better meeting the disadvantage- and culture-related needs of young people with early psychosis and their families should be a priority for the field.