Three year outcomes in an early intervention service for psychosis in a multicultural and multiethnic population

Concern has been expressed that it may be difficult to provide certain interventions to some ethnic groups in an Early Intervention Service for Psychosis, and that as a consequence, three-year outcomes for the different Ethnic Groups may be different in different groups. To test whether there are differences between the three year outcomes of different ethnic groups represented in the patient population of an Early Intervention service for Psychosis.

The three-year outcomes for the first group of 62 Patients to receive three years treatment in the Early Intervention Service in Luton, Bedfordshire were examined. This group well represented the ethnic mix of the population of Luton.

It does not appear that there are major differences between the three-year outcomes of any one of the three groups studied. However the South Asian Patients appear to present earlier, with shorter DUPs, seemed more likely to marry, live with their families, and seem more likely to return to higher education after a first psychotic episode of psychosis compared to the Caucasians. Afro-Carribeans and South Asians were more likely to be unemployed, but many South Asians were employed, as were Caucasians. The fewest persons employed were in the Afro-Caribbean group. While slightly more South Asians and Afro-Carribeans were admitted compulsorily under the mental health act over the three years, 60% of each of the two non-white groups were never admitted compulsorily. This is different from the reported national trends of the Mental Health act being used excessively with the Afro-Caribbean population.

No previous study has looked at the outcomes of Early Intervention Services for First Psychotic Episodes according to the Ethnic Origin of the Clients. The better outcomes seen with South Asians are probably due to cultural factors among the South Asians born in this country, rather than to issues related to the Psychotic Illness itself.

These findings are important in planning services in areas where there is much ethnic diversity. The above conclusions must be understood as relating to patients who are well engaged with services. It would be unwise to extrapolate these outcomes to patients in the general population who have not engaged with services.