Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorWold, Kristin Fjelnseth
dc.contributor.authorOttesen, Akiah
dc.contributor.authorFlaaten, Camilla Bärthel
dc.contributor.authorJohnsen, Erik
dc.contributor.authorLagerberg, Trine Vik
dc.contributor.authorRomm, Kristin Lie
dc.contributor.authorSimonsen, Carmen
dc.contributor.authorUeland, Torill
dc.contributor.authorWiding, Line Hustad
dc.contributor.authorÅsbø, Gina
dc.contributor.authorMelle, Ingrid
dc.date.accessioned2023-08-16T12:18:33Z
dc.date.available2023-08-16T12:18:33Z
dc.date.created2023-03-29T21:10:35Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.identifier.issn0924-9338
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/3084401
dc.description.abstractBackground Approximately one-third of patients with psychotic disorders does not respond to standard antipsychotic treatments. Consensus criteria for treatment resistance (TR) may aid the identification of non-response and subsequent tailoring of treatments. Since consensus criteria require stability of clinical status, they are challenging to apply in first-episode psychosis (FEP). This study aims to investigate (a) if an adaptation of consensus criteria can be used to identify FEP patients with early signs of TR (no early clinical recovery—no-ECR) after 1 year in treatment and (b) to what extent differences in antipsychotic treatments differentiate between outcome groups. Methods Participants with FEP DSM-IV schizophrenia spectrum disorders were recruited during their first treatment. A total of 207 participated in the 1-year follow-up. Remission and recovery definitions were based on adaptations of the “Remission in Schizophrenia Working Group” criteria and TR on adaptations of the “Treatment Response and Resistance in Psychosis” (TRRIP) working group criteria. Results 97 participants (47%) could be classified as no-ECR, 61 (30%) as ECR, and 49 (23%) as with partial ECR (P-ECR). Statistically significant baseline predictors of no-ECR matched previously identified predictors of long-term TR. Only 35 no-ECR participants had two adequate treatment trials and met the full TRRIP criteria. 21 no-ECR participants were using the same medication over the follow-up year despite the lack of significant effects. Conclusion The difference in the percentage of FEP participants classified as no-ECR versus TR indicates that we may underestimate the prevalence of early TR when using consensus criteria.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherCambridge University Pressen_US
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleEarly identification of treatment non-response in first-episode psychosisen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2023 The Author(s)en_US
dc.source.articlenumbere30en_US
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode2
dc.identifier.doi10.1192/j.eurpsy.2023.15
dc.identifier.cristin2138296
dc.source.journalEuropean psychiatryen_US
dc.identifier.citationEuropean psychiatry. 2023, 66 (1), e30.en_US
dc.source.volume66en_US
dc.source.issue1en_US


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal