Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38317157›Full record

ArticleBMC psychiatry2024

Monthly engagement with EIP keyworkers was associated with a five-fold increase in the odds of engagement with psychosocial interventions.

C D Darker, G Nicolson, H Reddon, K O'Connor, R Jennings, N O'Connell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

C D DarkerDiscipline of Public Health and Primary Care, Institute of Population Health, School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. catherine.darker@tcd.ie.
G NicolsonHealth Promotion and Improvement Department, HSE Health and Wellbeing, 1st Floor Old National Ambulance Training Building, St Marys Hospital Campus, Phoenix Park, Dublin 20, Chapelizod, D20 TY72, Ireland.
H ReddonDepartment of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
K O'ConnorNational Clinical Programme for Early Intervention in Psychosis, Health Service Executive Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
R JenningsNational Clinical Programme for Early Intervention in Psychosis, Health Service Executive Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
N O'ConnellSexual Health and Crisis Pregnancy Programme, HSE Health and Wellbeing, Strategy and Research, 89-94 Capel St, Dublin 1, Dublin, D01 P281, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEarly intervention in psychosis (EIP) supports people who are experiencing their first episode of psychosis (FEP). A new Model of Care (MoC) for EIP services was launched in Ireland in 2019. Three EIP demonstration sites were chosen to test this MoC through a 'hub and spoke' approach. These services were a new way of organising care for people experiencing FEP, based upon a recovery model of care, and which sought to standardise care, improve access by clinically led multidisciplinary teams. This included newly created EIP keyworker roles whereby keyworkers assumed responsibilities regarding assessment, comprehensive individual care planning and coordination of care.

methodsA mixed methods design utilising the UK Medical Research Council's process evaluation framework. Purposive sampling techniques were utilised. Descriptive analyses and logistic regression were performed to examine how increased keyworker engagement influenced the use of other psychosocial interventions within the EIP demonstration sites. Thematic analyses was used for qualitative data.

resultsThere was a strong positive relationship between keyworker contacts and psychosocial interventions offered. Specifically, the odds of achieving at least monthly engagement with cognitive behavioural therapy for psychosis (CBTp; (5.76 (2.43-13.64), p < 0.001), and behavioural family therapy (BFT; (5.52(1.63-18.69, p < 0.006)) increased by fivefold with each additional monthly keyworker contact. For individual placement support (IPS) each additional monthly keyworker contact was associated with a three-fold increase in the odds of achieving monthly attendance with IPS (3.73 (1.64-8.48), p < 0.002). Qualitative results found that the EIP keyworker role as viewed by both service users and staff as a valuable nodal point, with a particular emphasis on care coordination and effective communication.

conclusionsThis study advances the understanding of keyworker effects through qualitative evidence of keyworkers functioning as a "linchpin" to the service, while the positive response association between keyworker contacts and engagement with other services provides quantitative support for keyworkers reducing the organisational or structural barriers to service access. Given the importance of these positions, health systems should ensure that EIP programmes identify qualified and experienced staff to fill these roles, as well as allocate the appropriate funding and protected time to support keyworker engagement and impact.

Indexed as

Cognitive Behavioral TherapyPsychotic DisordersBehavior TherapyEarly Medical InterventionHumansPsychosocial InterventionCare coordinatorDemonstration sitesEarly intervention in psychosisEngagementFirst episode psychosisKeyworkerModel of careProcess evaluationQualitative

Identifiers

PMID38317157
PMCPMC10840293

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.