A risk factor screening and assessment protocol for schizophrenia and related psychosis

Objective: The Psychological Assistance Service (PAS) opened in Newcastle, New South Wales in 1997 as a clinical service for the assessment and treatment of young people at high risk of psychosis and those experiencing a first psychotic episode. The aim of this paper is to describe the assessment protocol of PAS, which is strongly influenced by the neurodevelopmental perspective on early onset psychosis. Method: The systematic assessment of patients referred to PAS using a protocol over a 2 week period is described. The protocol includes a narrative history, structured diagnostic interview, quantitative assessment of symptoms and other clinical features, a neurological examination and comprehensive neuropsychological test battery. Results: The clinic has received over 250 referrals in a 2 year period and accepted 116 patients for a full assessment, of whom 60 were deemed to be 'at-risk' of psychosis and 56 were experiencing their first psychotic episode. Both groups were similar with respect to gender and there were minor age differences. The first-episode group experienced more reality distortion, schizotypal and negative symptoms. While both groups showed some neuropsychological and neurological impairment, there were no statistically significant differences between the groups on these variables except for a test of executive functioning in which the first-episode group was more impaired than the 'at-risk' group. A low rate of conversion to psychosis occurred in the 'at-risk' group. Conclusions: The minor differences between the two groups may have been related to relatively small sample sizes, although some similarities between the groups were to be expected. The low rate of conversion to psychosis in the 'at-risk' group is discussed. Further analyses using larger samples are necessary to determine the validity of the various 'at-risk' categories and this will involve following a sufficiently large sample over an adequate time. The most efficient way of doing this would be to pool data across centres with comparable early intervention programs.