The first rate-limiting step to successfully translate prevention of psychosis in to clinical practice is to establish specialised Clinical High Risk for Psychosis (CHR-P) services. This study systematises the knowledge regarding CHR-P services and provides guidelines for translational implementation. We conducted a PRISMA/MOOSE-compliant (PROSPERO-CRD42020163640) systematic review of Web of Science to identify studies until 4/05/2020 reporting on CHR-P service configuration, outreach strategy and referrals, service user characteristics, interventions, and outcomes. Fifty-six studies (1998–2020) were included, encompassing 51 distinct CHR-P services across 15 countries and a catchment area of 17,252,666 people. Most services (80.4%) consisted of integrated multidisciplinary teams taking care of CHR-P and other patients. Outreach encompassed active (up to 97.6%) or passive (up to 63.4%) approaches: referrals came mostly (90%) from healthcare agencies. CHR-P individuals were more frequently males (57.2%). Most (70.6%) services accepted individuals aged 12–35 years, typically assessed with the CAARMS/SIPS (83.7%). Baseline comorbid mental conditions were reported in two-third (69.5%) of cases, and unemployment in one third (36.6%). Most services provided up to 2-years (72.4%), of clinical monitoring (100%), psychoeducation (81.1%), psychosocial support (73%), family interventions (73%), individual (67.6%) and group (18.9%) psychotherapy, physical health interventions (37.8%), antipsychotics (87.1%), antidepressants (74.2%), anxiolytics (51.6%), and mood stabilisers (38.7%). Outcomes were more frequently ascertained clinically (93.0%) and included: persistence of symptoms/comorbidities (67.4%), transition to psychosis (53.5%), and functional status (48.8%). We provide ten practical recommendations for implementation of CHR-P services. Health service knowledge summarised by the current study will facilitate translational efforts for implementation of CHR-P services worldwide.

Informal caregivers of individuals affected by psychotic disorder can play a key role in the recovery process. However, little research has been conducted on the lived experiences of carers and family members. We conducted a bottom-up (from lived experience to theory) review of first-person accounts, co-written between academics and experts by experience, to identify key experiential themes. First-person accounts of carers, relatives, and individuals with psychosis were screened and discussed in collaborative workshops involving individuals with lived experiences of psychosis, family members, and carers, representing various organizations. The lived experiences of family members and carers were characterized by experiential themes related to dealing with the unexpected news, the search for a reason behind the disorder, living with difficult and negative emotions, dealing with loss, feeling lost in fragmented healthcare systems, feeling invisible and wanting to be active partners in care, struggling to communicate with the affected person, fighting stigma and isolation, dealing with an uncertain future, and learning from one’s mistakes and building resilience and hope. Our findings bring forth the voices of relatives and informal carers of people with psychosis, by highlighting some of the common themes of their lived experiences from the time of the initial diagnosis and throughout the different clinical stages of the disorder. Informal carers are key stakeholders who can play a strategic role, and their contributions in the recovery process merit recognition and active support by mental health professionals.

This umbrella review aims to comprehensively synthesize the evidence of association between peripheral, electrophysiological, neuroimaging, neuropathological, and other biomarkers and diagnosis of psychotic disorders. We selected systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies on diagnostic biomarkers for psychotic disorders, published until February 1, 2018. Data extraction was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Evidence of association between biomarkers and psychotic disorders was classified as convincing, highly suggestive, suggestive, weak, or non-significant, using a standardized classification. Quality analyses used the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) tool. The umbrella review included 110 meta-analyses or systematic reviews corresponding to 3892 individual studies, 1478 biomarkers, and 392 210 participants. No factor showed a convincing level of evidence. Highly suggestive evidence was observed for transglutaminase autoantibodies levels (odds ratio [OR] = 7.32; 95% CI: 3.36, 15.94), mismatch negativity in auditory event-related potentials (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.5, 0.96), P300 component latency (SMD = −0.6; 95% CI: −0.83, −0.38), ventricle-brain ratio (SMD = 0.61; 95% CI: 0.5, 0.71), and minor physical anomalies (SMD = 0.99; 95% CI: 0.64, 1.34). Suggestive evidence was observed for folate, malondialdehyde, brain-derived neurotrophic factor, homocysteine, P50 sensory gating (P50 S2/S1 ratio), frontal N-acetyl-aspartate, and high-frequency heart rate variability. Among the remaining biomarkers, weak evidence was found for 626 and a non-significant association for 833 factors. While several biomarkers present highly suggestive or suggestive evidence of association with psychotic disorders, methodological biases, and underpowered studies call for future higher-quality research.

Introduction: Indicated primary prevention of psychosis is recommended by NICE clinical guidelines, but implementation research on Clinical High Risk for Psychosis (CHR-P) services is limited.Methods: Electronic audit of CHR-P services in England, conducted between June and September 2021, addressing core implementation domains: service configuration, detection of at-risk individuals, prognostic assessment, clinical care, clinical research, and implementation challenges, complemented by comparative analyses across service model. Descriptive statistics, Fisher's exact test and Mann-Whitney U-tests were employed.Results: Twenty-four CHR-P clinical services (19 cities) were included. Most (83.3%) services were integrated within other mental health services; only 16.7% were standalone. Across 21 services, total yearly caseload of CHR-P individuals was 693 (average: 33; range: 4–115). Most services (56.5%) accepted individuals aged 14–35; the majority (95.7%) utilized the Comprehensive Assessment of At Risk Mental States (CAARMS). About 65% of services reported some provision of NICE-compliant interventions encompassing monitoring of mental state, cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), and family interventions. However, only 66.5 and 4.9% of CHR-P individuals actually received CBT and family interventions, respectively. Core implementation challenges included: recruitment of specialized professionals, lack of dedicated budget, and unmet training needs. Standalone services reported fewer implementation challenges, had larger caseloads (p = 0.047) and were more likely to engage with clinical research (p = 0.037) than integrated services.Discussion: While implementation of CHR-P services is observed in several parts of England, only standalone teams appear successful at detection of at-risk individuals. Compliance with NICE-prescribed interventions is limited across CHR-P services and unmet needs emerge for national training and investments.