Abstract
Objective
To describe the provision of care for young people following first diagnosis of psychotic disorder.
Design
Retrospective cohort study using health administrative data.
Setting
Ontario.
Participants
People aged 14 to 35 years with a first diagnosis of nonaffective psychotic disorder in Ontario between 2005 and 2015 (N=39,449).
Main outcome measures
Models of care, defined by psychosis-related service contacts with primary care physicians and psychiatrists during the 2 years after first diagnosis of psychotic disorder.
Results
During the 2-year follow-up period, 29% of the cohort received only primary care, 30% received only psychiatric care, and 32% received both primary and psychiatric care (shared care). Among the shared care group, 72% received care predominantly from psychiatrists, 20% received care predominantly from primary care physicians, and 9% received approximately equal care from psychiatry and primary care. Variation in patient and physician characteristics was observed across the different models of care.
Conclusion
One in 3 young people with psychotic disorder received shared care during the 2-year period after first diagnosis. The findings highlight opportunities for increasing collaboration between primary care physicians and psychiatrists to enhance the quality of care for those with early psychosis.
Résumé
Objectif
Décrire la prestation des soins à de jeunes gens à la suite d’un premier diagnostic de trouble psychotique.
Type d’étude
Une étude rétrospective de cohortes à l’aide de données administratives sur la santé.
Contexte
L’Ontario.
Participants
Des personnes âgées de 14 à 35 ans qui avaient reçu un premier diagnostic de trouble psychotique non affectif en Ontario entre 2005 et 2015 (N=39 449).
Principaux paramètres à l’étude
Les modèles de soins, tels que définis par des contacts avec des services liés à la psychose dispensés par des médecins de soins primaires et des psychiatres durant les 2 années suivant un premier diagnostic de trouble psychotique.
Résultats
Durant la période de 2 ans de suivi, 29 % de la cohorte n’avaient reçu que des soins primaires, 30 % avaient reçu seulement des soins psychiatriques et 32 % avaient reçu à la fois des soins primaires et psychiatriques (soins partagés). Au sein du groupe des soins partagés, 72 % avaient surtout reçu des soins d’un psychiatre, 20 % avaient surtout été traités par des médecins de soins primaires et 9 % avaient reçu des soins en parts à peu près égales en psychiatrie et en soins primaires. Les variations dans les caractéristiques des patients et des médecins ont été observées dans les différents modèles de soins.
Conclusion
Une jeune personne sur 3 souffrant d’un trouble psychotique avait reçu des soins partagés durant la période de 2 ans suivant le diagnostic initial. Les constatations mettent en évidence des possibilités d’une plus grande coopération entre les médecins de soins primaires et les psychiatres pour améliorer la qualité de vie des jeunes à un stade précoce de psychose.
Primary care physicians play an integral role in early psychosis intervention in Canada. Two-thirds of young people make help-seeking contacts in primary care for mental health concerns before first diagnosis of psychotic disorder, which considerably increases in the year preceding diagnosis,1 and one-third ultimately receive their first diagnosis from a primary care physician.2 Involvement of primary care physicians during help seeking is also associated with lower likelihood of negative pathways to care and readmissions to hospital,3,4 and with greater likelihood of physician follow-up.5 Despite the recent proliferation of early psychosis intervention programs, many young people do not access these specialized services after a first diagnosis of psychotic disorder and instead receive ongoing mental health care from primary care physicians.6-8
Serious mental illnesses such as psychotic disorders are generally beyond the core training and standard practice of primary care.9,10 Primary care physicians have described their care for patients with these illnesses as inadequate,11,12 citing a lack of time, resources, support, and clinical experience as contributing factors.13,14 Although many primary care physicians prefer psychiatrist involvement in diagnosing and treating serious mental illness,9,10 they frequently report issues in navigating psychiatric services, including limited access to consultations, long wait times for referrals, and overall poor communication.15,16 For patients with serious mental illness, these issues can lead to uncoordinated, discontinuous, and unsatisfactory care,17,18 as well as considerable barriers to accessing necessary services.19,20
A shared care model is a process of systematic collaboration between primary care and specialist physicians when providing care for patients with chronic health conditions.21,22 Physicians practising in this model allocate care according to their defined roles and respective capabilities, while also sharing expertise, resources, and decision making.23,24 A basic framework of shared care involves a system of regular communication between physicians for the coordination of patient care.23 In its most comprehensive form, shared care aims to fully integrate primary and specialist care, including co-location of services, unification of medical records, and implementation of combined treatment protocols.24 For patients with mental illness, shared care has demonstrated success relative to usual care in improving several patient-centred, service-related, and clinical outcomes.25-27 While research has focused on common mental disorders, such as anxiety and depression, there is evidence to suggest that shared care could enhance care for young people with psychotic disorders.28
Currently, there is limited information on health service provision for psychotic disorders by primary care physicians in Ontario. Prior research on this topic only examined use of primary care by patients of early psychosis intervention services, and did not consider shared care between primary care physicians and outpatient psychiatrists.6,7 Since early psychosis is relatively rare in the context of primary care, the importance of primary care physicians in ongoing management of patients with psychotic disorders has been underappreciated. Therefore, we sought to describe models of care by primary care physicians for young people following a first diagnosis of psychotic disorder in Ontario, and to describe the characteristics of patients and physicians across these models of care.
METHODS
We conducted a retrospective cohort study using population-based health administrative data from ICES in Ontario. ICES is an independent, non-profit research institute that is a prescribed entity under section 45 of Ontario’s Personal Health Information Protection Act,29 which enables compilation and analysis of personal health information related to the management, evaluation, and monitoring of the health system without consent for such purposes. The portions of this study that involve health administrative data from ICES do not require review by a research ethics board. Databases at ICES contain information on health service encounters, as well as characteristics of patients and physicians, and are linked using unique, encoded identifiers.
Our cohort comprised Ontario residents between the ages of 14 and 35 years with an incident diagnosis of nonaffective psychotic disorder between April 2005 and March 2015.30 Cases were identified by a diagnosis of schizophrenia spectrum disorder or psychosis not otherwise specified, either from 1 hospitalization or from 2 visits to an emergency department or outpatient physician within a 1-year period. The index date was defined as either the date of discharge from hospitalization or the date of first visit to an emergency department or outpatient clinic. Cases with a diagnosis before cohort inception were removed to exclude prevalent cases. A modified version of this algorithm has been previously validated using medical charts at ICES.31
We identified patient contacts with primary care physicians (family physicians and pediatricians) and outpatient psychiatrists that had a diagnostic code for nonaffective psychotic disorder over the 2 years after the index date. We categorized patients into 4 models of care based on the number of contacts with each type of physician during this 2-year follow-up period: only primary care, only psychiatric care, both primary care and psychiatric care (shared care), and neither type of care (low engagement). We further categorized patients receiving shared care according to the distribution of care between the 2 specialties: primary care dominant, psychiatric care dominant, and approximately equal care.
Patient sociodemographic characteristics included age, sex, rural residence, migrant status, and neighbourhood-level marginalization using the Ontario Marginalization Index.32 Clinical characteristics included the specific diagnosis of psychotic disorder and setting of diagnosis, as well as the number and type of comorbid chronic conditions derived from the Johns Hopkins Adjusted Clinical Group System, version 10.33 We also examined service use in the 2 years before first diagnosis, including hospital admissions and emergency department visits, both for psychiatric or nonpsychiatric reasons.
Physician characteristics included age, sex, years since medical school graduation, international medical school graduate status, and practice location. For primary care physicians, we also described their practices in terms of size, model, and comprehensiveness. Practice models were defined by the number and type of health professionals involved in the associated physician compensation model.34 Practice comprehensiveness was determined according to the breadth of care provided across multiple service-related domains, which has been described in detail elsewhere.35
We described the cohort using frequencies and proportions, as well as medians and interquartile ranges. All analyses were conducted using SAS, version 9.4.
RESULTS
We identified 39,449 patients with a first diagnosis of nonaffective psychotic disorder in Ontario during the 10-year period (Figure 1). During the 2 years following first diagnosis, 29% (n=11,304) of patients received care for psychosis exclusively from primary care physicians, 30% (n=11,818) received care exclusively from psychiatrists, and 32% received shared care from both specialties (n=12,786). Among patients receiving shared care, 72% (n=9179) received care predominantly from psychiatrists, 20% (n=2504) received care predominantly from primary care physicians, and 9% (n=1103) received approximately equal care between the 2 specialties. Finally, 9% (n=3541) of the cohort did not receive care for psychosis from either specialty during the 2-year follow-up period.
Figure 1.
Distribution of patients with a first diagnosis of psychotic disorder across models of care
Across the different models of care, we observed some variation in the distribution of patient characteristics (Table 1) and physician characteristics (Table 2). In the primary care model, a greater proportion of patients were diagnosed with schizophrenia spectrum disorders, received their first diagnosis in primary care, and had more comorbid conditions relative to other models. In the psychiatric care model, a greater proportion of patients were diagnosed with psychosis not otherwise specified, received their diagnosis in secondary or tertiary care, and lived in an area that was urban and had greater marginalization. In the shared care models, a greater proportion of patients were immigrants or refugees, had no chronic conditions, and had no service use in the 2 years before first diagnosis. Patients with low engagement were largely diagnosed with psychosis not otherwise specified, received their first diagnosis in secondary or tertiary care, had multiple chronic conditions, and had greater prior service use.
Table 1.
Characteristics of patients with a first diagnosis of psychotic disorder, by model of care: N=39,449.
| CHARACTERISTIC | PRIMARY CARE (n=11,304) |
PSYCHIATRIC CARE (n=11,818) |
SHARED CARE | LOW ENGAGEMENT (n=3541) |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PRIMARY CARE DOMINANT (n=2504) |
PSYCHIATRIC CARE DOMINANT (n=9179) |
EQUAL CARE (n=1103) |
||||
| Physician visits per year | ||||||
| Primary care, median (IQR) | 1.0 (0.5-2.0) | 0 (0) | 3.0 (1.5-6.5) | 1.0 (0.5-2.0) | 0.5 (0.5-1.0) | 0 (0) |
| Psychiatric care, median (IQR) | 0 (0) | 2.0 (1.0-6.0) | 1.0 (0.5-2.0) | 8.0 (4.0-15.5) | 0.5 (0.5-1.0) | 0 (0) |
| Sociodemographic characteristics | ||||||
| Median (IQR) age, y | 25 (20-30) | 23 (19-28) | 23 (19-29) | 22 (19-27) | 23 (20-29) | 24 (20-30) |
| Sex, n (%) | ||||||
|
6295 (55.7) | 7551 (63.9) | 1759 (70.2) | 6545 (71.3) | 752 (68.2) | 2147 (60.6) |
|
5009 (44.3) | 4267 (36.1) | 745 (29.8) | 2634 (28.7) | 351 (31.8) | 1394 (39.4) |
| Residence, n (%) | ||||||
|
9934 (87.9) | 11,049 (93.5) | 2266 (90.5) | 8508 (92.7) | 1010 (91.6) | 3167 (89.4) |
|
1370 (12.1) | 769 (6.5) | 238 (9.5) | 671 (7.3) | 93 (8.4) | 374 (10.6) |
| Migrant status, n (%) | ||||||
|
9764 (86.4) | 9743 (82.4) | 1947 (77.8) | 7075 (77.1) | 877 (79.5) | 3010 (85.0) |
|
1159 (10.3) | 1576 (13.3) | 412 (16.5) | 1601 (17.4) | 173 (15.7) | 380 (10.7) |
|
381 (3.4) | 499 (4.2) | 145 (5.8) | 503 (5.5) | 53 (4.8) | 151 (4.3) |
| Marginalization, n (%) | ||||||
|
10,155 (89.8) | 11,113 (94.0) | 2294 (91.6) | 8579 (93.5) | 1029 (93.3) | 3168 (89.5) |
|
1149 (10.2) | 705 (6.0) | 210 (8.4) | 600 (6.5) | 74 (6.7) | 373 (10.5) |
|
4721 (41.8) | 4394 (37.2) | 879 (35.1) | 3330 (36.3) | 405 (36.7) | 1524 (43.0) |
|
6583 (58.2) | 7424 (62.8) | 1625 (64.9) | 5849 (63.7) | 698 (63.3) | 2017 (57.0) |
|
3640 (32.2) | 3483 (29.5) | 955 (38.1) | 3010 (32.8) | 363 (32.9) | 970 (27.4) |
|
7664 (67.8) | 8335 (70.5) | 1549 (61.9) | 6169 (67.2) | 740 (67.1) | 2571 (72.6) |
|
1128 (10.0) | 727 (6.2) | 176 (7.0) | 620 (6.8) | 79 (7.2) | 309 (8.7) |
|
10,176 (90.0) | 11,094 (93.9) | 2328 (93.0) | 8559 (93.2) | 1024 (92.8) | 3232 (91.3) |
| Clinical characteristics | ||||||
| Psychotic disorder, n (%) | ||||||
|
7309 (64.7) | 4874 (41.2) | 1296 (51.8) | 4024 (43.8) | 458 (41.5) | 1447 (40.9) |
|
3995 (35.3) | 6944 (58.8) | 1208 (48.2) | 5155 (56.2) | 645 (58.5) | 2094 (59.1) |
|
7515 (66.5) | 856 (7.2) | 817 (32.6) | 1558 (17.0) | 267 (24.2) | 788 (22.3) |
|
3789 (33.5) | 10,962 (92.8) | 1687 (67.4) | 7621 (83.0) | 836 (75.8) | 2753 (77.7) |
| Comorbid disorders, n (%) | ||||||
|
4616 (40.8) | 5675 (48.0) | 1290 (51.5) | 5193 (56.6) | 497 (45.1) | 1417 (40.0) |
|
4072 (36.0) | 3985 (33.7) | 773 (30.9) | 2747 (29.9) | 376 (34.1) | 1237 (34.9) |
|
2616 (23.1) | 2158 (18.3) | 441 (17.6) | 1239 (13.5) | 230 (20.9) | 887 (25.0) |
|
3802 (33.6) | 3373 (28.5) | 674 (26.9) | 2118 (23.1) | 321 (29.1) | 1242 (35.1) |
|
9393 (83.1) | 9428 (79.8) | 1842 (73.6) | 6596 (71.9) | 852 (77.2) | 2960 (83.6) |
| Service use over 2 y before index date | ||||||
| Hospital admissions, n (%) | ||||||
|
1551 (13.7) | 1380 (11.7) | 291 (11.6) | 822 (9.0) | 157 (14.2) | 548 (15.5) |
|
1353 (12.0) | 1119 (9.5) | 214 (8.5) | 642 (7.0) | 124 (11.2) | 495 (14.0) |
| Emergency department visits, n (%) | ||||||
|
3391 (30.0) | 4137 (35.0) | 793 (31.7) | 2828 (30.8) | 397 (36.0) | 1493 (42.2) |
|
6816 (60.3) | 6695 (56.7) | 1388 (55.4) | 4821 (52.5) | 661 (59.9) | 2288 (64.6) |
ADG—aggregated diagnosis group, IQR—interquartile range, PNOS—psychosis not otherwise specified, SSD—schizophrenia spectrum disorder.
Table 2.
Characteristics of physicians caring for patients with a first diagnosis of psychotic disorder, by model of care: Some numbers and percentages are missing for each characteristic.
| CHARACTERISTIC | PRIMARY CARE (n=11,304) |
PSYCHIATRIC CARE (n=11,818) |
SHARED CARE | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PRIMARY CARE DOMINANT (n=2504) |
PSYCHIATRIC CARE DOMINANT (n=9179) |
EQUAL CARE (n=1103) |
|||
| Primary care | |||||
| Median (IQR) age, y | 51 (42-58) | NA | 52 (43-57) | 49 (40-57) | 49 (39-57) |
| Sex, n (%) | |||||
|
8169 (72.3) | NA | 1920 (76.7) | 6744 (73.5) | 825 (74.8) |
|
3041 (26.9) | NA | 555 (22.2) | 2256 (24.6) | 260 (23.6) |
| Physician type, n (%) | |||||
|
10,181 (90.1) | NA | 2270 (90.7) | 7362 (80.2) | 911 (82.6) |
|
155 (1.4) | NA | 16 (0.6) | 132 (1.4) | 7 (0.6) |
|
806 (7.1) | NA | 172 (6.9) | 1401 (15.3) | 167 (15.1) |
| Median (IQR) years since graduation | 25 (15-33) | NA | 26 (17-32) | 23 (13-31) | 23 (13-31) |
| International graduate, n (%) | |||||
|
9325 (82.5) | NA | 2101 (83.9) | 7453 (81.2) | 934 (84.7) |
|
1879 (16.6) | NA | 372 (14.9) | 1531 (16.7) | 150 (13.6) |
| Practice location, n (%) | |||||
|
10,247 (90.6) | NA | 2327 (92.9) | 8600 (93.7) | 1025 (92.9) |
|
967 (8.6) | NA | 149 (6.0) | 402 (4.4) | 61 (5.5) |
| Practice type, n (%) | |||||
|
3947 (34.9) | NA | 998 (39.9) | 4524 (49.3) | 570 (51.7) |
|
6044 (53.5) | NA | 1247 (49.8) | 3792 (41.3) | 430 (39.0) |
|
1313 (11.6) | NA | 259 (10.3) | 863 (9.4) | 103 (9.3) |
| Practice comprehensiveness, n (%) | |||||
|
8463 (74.9) | NA | 1770 (70.7) | 5479 (59.7) | 641 (58.1) |
|
177 (1.6) | NA | 39 (1.6) | 129 (1.4) | 12 (1.1) |
|
1009 (8.9) | NA | 339 (13.5) | 1360 (14.8) | 191 (17.3) |
|
784 (6.9) | NA | 151 (6.0) | 1348 (14.7) | 152 (13.8) |
|
777 (6.9) | NA | 176 (7.0) | 679 (7.4) | 90 (8.2) |
| Panel size, n (%) | |||||
|
3104 (27.5) | NA | 589 (23.5) | 1991 (21.7) | 234 (21.2) |
|
4474 (39.5) | NA | 957 (38.2) | 2843 (31.0) | 315 (28.6) |
|
371 (3.3) | NA | 64 (2.5) | 227 (2.5) | 26 (2.4) |
| Psychiatry | |||||
| Median (IQR) age, y | NA | 49 (40-58) | 52 (41-59) | 49 (41-58) | 51 (42-58) |
| Sex, n (%) | |||||
|
NA | 7974 (67.5) | 1811 (72.3) | 6540 (71.2) | 768 (69.6) |
|
NA | 3702 (31.3) | 630 (25.2) | 2400 (26.1) | 310 (28.1) |
| Median (IQR) years since graduation | NA | 23 (14-33) | 26 (14-34) | 24 (13-33) | 25 (14-34) |
| International graduate, n (%) | |||||
|
NA | 6328 (53.5) | 1283 (51.2) | 4778 (52.1) | 626 (56.8) |
|
NA | 5344 (45.2) | 1158 (46.2) | 4156 (45.3) | 451 (40.9) |
| Practice location, n (%) | |||||
|
NA | 11,600 (98.2) | 2421 (96.7) | 8905 (97.0) | 1072 (97.2) |
|
NA | 81 (0.7) | 20 (0.8) | 36 (0.4) | 7 (0.6) |
IQR—interquartile range, NA—not applicable.
Among primary care physicians, the primary care model had a greater number of physicians with a longer time from graduation and had a greater proportion with practices that were rural, team-based, and comprehensive when compared with the shared care models. However, there was minimal variation in characteristics among psychiatrists across the psychiatric care and shared care models.
DISCUSSION
In Canada, enhanced integration of specialized mental health services into primary care is at the core of health care reforms.36 Herein, we operationalized models of shared care for patients with nonaffective psychotic disorder in Ontario based on health service use during the 2 years following first diagnosis. These models can be used to describe how primary care physicians and psychiatrists deliver services at the population level for other mental health conditions and in other health care settings.37
We found that approximately half of patients with a first diagnosis of psychotic disorder received ongoing mental health care from primary care physicians, but only one-third of them were receiving shared care. Research has shown that a substantial proportion of patients do not receive outpatient psychiatric care within the first month after diagnosis,5 and are not referred or admitted to early psychosis intervention services.7,8 Patients who do not use these services are more likely to have mental health contacts with a primary care physician and less likely to contact a psychiatrist during the 2 years after first diagnosis.7,8 Conversely, less than half of patients admitted to these services had contact with a primary care physician during this period.6 While we do not have information on early psychosis intervention services, it may be worth exploring how these specialized services are associated with different models of care.
We observed some differences in characteristics of patients and physicians across the models of care. These differences could reflect patient factors, such as severity of psychotic symptoms and presence of physical comorbidities, as well as physician factors, such as clinical experience and referral decisions. Our findings may also be reflective of systemic factors, including the availability of resources and accessibility of services. Subsequent studies on this topic should examine the different factors influencing the unique patient and physician profiles associated with each model of care.
Collectively, our findings indicate that there are opportunities to further engage primary care physicians in early psychosis intervention. The evidence suggests that shared care could help improve the accessibility, acceptability, efficiency, and effectiveness of care for patients with psychotic disorders.38 In the future, researchers should investigate whether our models of shared care are associated with improved quality of care in the short term and better clinical outcomes in the long term. However, the implementation of shared care requires careful consideration of individual-, organizational-, and system-level factors, all of which are necessary to effect meaningful change.39
Limitations
Although we did not identify care provided by nonphysicians, it should be noted that shared care is defined by the collaboration of primary care and specialist physicians. Our models of care were operationalized using health administrative data, and so we could not be certain whether physicians were engaging in shared care. However, prior research has demonstrated that administratively obtained definitions of shared care often reflect physician-reported shared care.40 Future research could use clinical data to determine whether our operationalization accurately represents the care being provided by physicians.
Conclusion
During the 2 years after a first diagnosis of psychotic disorder, 1 in 3 young people in Ontario received shared care from both a primary care physician and a psychiatrist. These results suggest that there may be gaps in addressing the complex health needs of these patients, which can have an adverse impact on long-term clinical outcomes. Nonetheless, there may be opportunities for increased collaboration between primary care physicians and psychiatrists to enhance the quality of care for patients with early psychosis.
Acknowledgment
This study received funding from a project grant from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. The data set from this study will be held securely at ICES. The full data set creation plan is available from the authors upon request. While data sharing agreements prohibit ICES from making the data set publicly available, access can be granted to those who meet prespecified criteria for confidential access. This study was supported by ICES, which is funded by an annual grant from the Ontario Ministry of Health and Ministry of Long-Term Care. The study was completed at ICES Western, where core funding is provided by the Academic Medical Organization of Southwestern Ontario, Lawson Health Research Institute, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, and Western University. Parts or whole of this material are based on data and information compiled and provided by the Ministry of Health; Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC); Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI); and Ontario Health. The analyses, conclusions, and statements expressed herein are solely those of the authors and do not reflect those of data or funding sources; no endorsement is intended or should be inferred.
Editor’s key points
▸ Approximately half of patients with a first diagnosis of psychotic disorder received ongoing mental health care from primary care physicians, but only one-third of them were receiving shared care.
▸ In the primary care model, a greater proportion of patients were diagnosed with schizophrenia spectrum disorders, received their first diagnosis in primary care, and had more comorbid conditions relative to other models. In the psychiatric care model, a greater proportion of patients were diagnosed with psychosis not otherwise specified, received their diagnosis in secondary or tertiary care, and lived in an area that was urban and had greater marginalization. In the shared care models, a greater proportion of patients were immigrants or refugees, had no chronic conditions, and had no service use in the 2 years before first diagnosis.
▸ The findings suggest that there are opportunities to further engage primary care physicians in early psychosis intervention. In the future, researchers should investigate whether models of shared care are associated with improved quality of care in the short term and better clinical outcomes in the long term.
Points de repère du rédacteur
▸ Environ la moitié des patients après un premier diagnostic de trouble psychotique avaient reçu des soins continus en santé mentale d’un médecin de soins primaires, mais seulement le tiers d’entre eux avaient reçu des soins partagés.
▸ Dans le modèle des soins primaires, une plus grande proportion des patients avaient reçu un diagnostic de trouble du spectre de la schizophrénie, avaient d’abord été diagnostiqués en soins primaires et souffraient de problèmes concomitants plus nombreux que dans d’autres modèles. Dans le modèle des soins psychiatriques, une plus grande proportion des patients avaient reçu un diagnostic de psychose sans autres précisions, posé en soins secondaires ou tertiaires, vivaient en milieu urbain et avaient fait l’objet d’une plus grande marginalisation. Dans le modèle des soins partagés, une plus grande proportion des patients étaient des immigrés ou des réfugiés, n’avaient pas de problèmes chroniques et n’avaient pas recouru à des services au cours des 2 années précédant le premier diagnostic.
▸ Les constatations font valoir qu’il existe des possibilités de mobiliser davantage les médecins de soins primaires dans les interventions pour la psychose à un stade précoce. À l’avenir, les chercheurs devraient se pencher sur la question de savoir si les soins partagés sont associés à une meilleure qualité des soins à court terme et à des issues cliniques plus favorables à long terme.
Footnotes
Contributors
Dr Kelly K. Anderson and Rebecca Rodrigues conceptualized and designed the study; Jennifer N.S. Reid analyzed the data; and Joshua C. Wiener drafted the manuscript. All authors were involved in interpreting the data and preparing the manuscript for submission.
Competing interests
None declared
This article has been peer reviewed.
Cet article a fait l’objet d’une révision par des pairs.
References
- 1.Schoer N, Rodrigues R, Reid J, Ryan BL, Lizotte DJ, Booth R, et al. Patterns of primary care use prior to a first diagnosis of nonaffective psychotic disorder in Ontario, Canada. Can J Psychiatry 2021;66(4):406-17. Epub 2020 Oct 5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Wiener JC, Rodrigues R, Reid JNS, Booth RG, Cheng C, Jan SH, et al. Patient and physician factors associated with first diagnosis of non-affective psychotic disorder in primary care. Adm Policy Ment Health 2023;50(2):212-24. Epub 2022 Nov 20. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Anderson KK, Fuhrer R, Schmitz N, Malla AK.. Determinants of negative pathways to care and their impact on service disengagement in first-episode psychosis. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 2013;48(1):125-36. Epub 2012 Sep 14. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Anderson KK, Fuhrer R, Wynant W, Abrahamowicz M, Buckeridge DL, Malla AK.. Patterns of health services use prior to a first diagnosis of psychosis: the importance of primary care. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 2013;48(9):1389-98. Epub 2013 Feb 21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Anderson KK, Kurdyak P.. Factors associated with timely physician follow-up after a first diagnosis of psychotic disorder. Can J Psychiatry 2017;62(4):268-77. Epub 2016 Oct 14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Anderson KK, Norman R, MacDougall A, Edwards J, Palaniyappan L, Lau C, et al. Effectiveness of early psychosis intervention: comparison of service users and nonusers in population-based health administrative data. Am J Psychiatry 2018;175(5):443-52. Epub 2018 Mar 2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Anderson KK, Norman RM, MacDougall AG, Edwards J, Palaniyappan L, Lau C, et al. Disparities in access to early psychosis intervention services: comparison of service users and nonusers in health administrative data. Can J Psychiatry 2018;63(6):395-403. Epub 2018 Mar 21. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Edwards J, Norman R, Kurdyak P, MacDougall AG, Palaniyappan L, Lau C, et al. Unmet need for mental health services among people screened but not admitted to an early psychosis intervention program. Schizophr Res 2019;204:55-7. Epub 2018 Aug 16. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Simon AE, Lauber C, Ludewig K, Braun-Scharm H, Umbricht DS; Swiss Early Psychosis Project . General practitioners and schizophrenia: results from a Swiss survey. Br J Psychiatry 2005;187:274-81. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Simon AE, Lester HE, Tait L, Stip E, Roy P, Conrad G, et al. The International Study on General Practitioners and Early Psychosis (IGPS). Schizophr Res 2009;108(1-3):182-90. Epub 2008 Dec 16. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Clatney L, MacDonald H, Shah SM.. Mental health care in the primary care setting. Family physicians’ perspectives. Can Fam Physician 2008;54:884-9. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Fleury MJ, Farand L, Aubé D, Imboua A.. Management of mental health problems by general practitioners in Quebec. Can Fam Physician 2012;58:e732-8 (Eng), e725-31 (Fr). Available from: https://www.cfp.ca/content/cfp/58/12/e732.full.pdf. Accessed 2023 Nov 9. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Oud MJT, Schuling J, Slooff CJ, Meyboom-de Jong B.. How do general practitioners experience providing care for their psychotic patients? BMC Fam Pract 2007;8:37. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Oud MJT, Schuling J, Slooff CJ, Groenier KH, Dekker JH, Meyboom-de Jong B.. Care for patients with severe mental illness: the general practitioner’s role perspective. BMC Fam Pract 2009;10:29. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Kisely S, Duerden D, Shaddick S, Jayabarathan A.. Collaboration between primary care and psychiatric services. Does it help family physicians? Can Fam Physician 2006;52:876-7. Available from: https://www.cfp.ca/content/cfp/52/7/876.full.pdf. Accessed 2023 Nov 9. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Gavin B, Cullen W, O’Donoghue B, Ascencio-Lane JC, Bury G, O’Callaghan E.. First episode schizophrenia in general practice: a national survey. Ir J Psychol Med 2006;23(1):6-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Reilly S, Planner C, Hann M, Reeves D, Nazareth I, Lester H.. The role of primary care in service provision for people with severe mental illness in the United Kingdom. PLoS One 2012;7(5):e36468. Epub 2012 May 15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.McGinty EE, Baller J, Azrin ST, Juliano-Bult D, Daumit GL.. Quality of medical care for persons with serious mental illness: a comprehensive review. Schizophr Res 2015;165(2-3):227-35. Epub 2015 Apr 27. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Bradford DW, Kim MM, Braxton LE, Marx CE, Butterfield M, Elbogen EB.. Access to medical care among persons with psychotic and major affective disorders. Psychiatr Serv 2008;59(8):847-52. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Ronaldson A, Elton L, Jayakumar S, Jieman A, Halvorsrud K, Bhui K.. Severe mental illness and health service utilisation for nonpsychiatric medical disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Med 2020;17(9):e1003284. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Hickman M, Drummond N, Grimshaw J.. A taxonomy of shared care for chronic disease. J Public Health Med 1994;16(4):447-54. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Kates N, Craven M, Bishop J, Clinton T, Kraftcheck D, LeClair K, et al. Shared mental health care in Canada. Can J Psychiatry 1997;42(8):i-xii. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Kates N. Mental health and primary care: contributing to mental health system transformation in Canada. Can J Commun Ment Health 2017;36(4):33-67. [Google Scholar]
- 24.Kates N, Arroll B, Currie E, Hanlon C, Gask L, Klasen H, et al. Improving collaboration between primary care and mental health services. World J Biol Psychiatry 2019;20(10):748-65. Epub 2018 Jun 20. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Woltmann E, Grogan-Kaylor A, Perron B, Georges H, Kilbourne AM, Bauer MS.. Comparative effectiveness of collaborative chronic care models for mental health conditions across primary, specialty, and behavioral health care settings: systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Psychiatry 2012;169(8):790-804. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Archer J, Bower P, Gilbody S, Lovell K, Richards D, Gask L, et al. Collaborative care for depression and anxiety problems. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;(10):CD006525. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Smith SM, Cousins G, Clyne B, Allwright S, O’Dowd T.. Shared care across the interface between primary and specialty care in management of long term conditions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;(2):CD004910. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Reilly S, Planner C, Gask L, Hann M, Knowles S, Druss B, et al. Collaborative care approaches for people with severe mental illness. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;(11):CD009531. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Personal Health Information Protection Act, 2004, S.O. 2004, c. 3, Sched. A. Available from: https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/04p03. Accessed 2023 Nov 22.
- 30.Anderson KK, Archie S, Booth RG, Cheng C, Lizotte D, MacDougall AG, et al. Understanding the role of the family physician in early psychosis intervention. BJPsych Open 2018;4(6):447-53. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Kurdyak P, Lin E, Green D, Vigod S.. Validation of a population-based algorithm to detect chronic psychotic illness. Can J Psychiatry 2015;60(8):362-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Matheson FI, Dunn JR, Smith KLW, Moineddin R, Glazier RH.. Development of the Canadian Marginalization Index: a new tool for the study of inequality. Can J Public Health 2012;103(Suppl 2):S12-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Austin PC, van Walraven C, Wodchis WP, Newman A, Anderson GM.. Using the Johns Hopkins Aggregated Diagnosis Groups (ADGs) to predict mortality in a general adult population cohort in Ontario, Canada. Med Care 2011;49(10):932-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.McLeod L, Buckley G, Sweetman A.. Ontario primary care models: a descriptive study. CMAJ Open 2016;4(4):E679-88. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Schultz SE, Glazier RH.. Identification of physicians providing comprehensive primary care in Ontario: a retrospective analysis using linked administrative data. CMAJ Open 2017;5(4):E856-63. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Innovation in primary care: integrating mental health services in primary care. College of Family Physicians of Canada, Canadian Psychiatric Association, Canadian Psychological Association; 2020. Available from: https://www.cfpc.ca/CFPC/media/PDF/IPC-Mental-Health-Report-2020-Final.pdf. Accessed 2023 Nov 22. [Google Scholar]
- 37.Kendall CE, Younger J, Manuel DG, Hogg W, Glazier RH, Taljaard M.. Health administrative data can be used to define a shared care typology for people with HIV. J Clin Epidemiol 2015;68(11):1301-11. Epub 2015 Feb 21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Carron T, Rawlinson C, Arditi C, Cohidon C, Hong QN, Pluye P, et al. An overview of reviews on interprofessional collaboration in primary care: effectiveness. Int J Integr Care 2021;21(2):31. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Rawlinson C, Carron T, Cohidon C, Arditi C, Hong QN, Pluye P, et al. An overview of reviews on interprofessional collaboration in primary care: barriers and facilitators. Int J Integr Care 2021;21(2):32. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Barnett ML, Landon BE, O’Malley AJ, Keating NL, Christakis NA.. Mapping physician networks with self-reported and administrative data. Health Serv Res 2011;46(5):1592-609. Epub 2011 Apr 26. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]