Routine evaluation in first episode psychosis services: feasibility and results from the MiData project

  • Helen Fisher
  • Kate Theodore
  • Paddy Power
  • Brock Chisholm
  • Jo Fuller
  • Karl Marlowe
  • Katherine J. Aitchison
  • Raj Tanna
  • John Joyce
  • Maxine Sacks
  • Thomas Craig
  • Sonia Johnson



Early intervention services (EIS) for psychosis are becoming widespread. Structured methods of assessment are advocated in these services, but a consensus is still needed on a package of measures with good psychometric properties that is feasible and reliable for routine use in this setting.


A computerised assessment package (MiData) was designed to provide clinicians with easy-to-understand feedback about clients’ progress and to allow evaluation of the whole service for both audit and research purposes. Core areas include symptoms, duration of untreated psychosis (DUP), pathways into care, social functioning, and substance misuse at initial intake and annually thereafter.


MiData has been adopted by EIS throughout London and in some other centres. Baseline data are now available regarding 533 first-episode psychosis patients who presented to 8 London teams. The completeness of the data varied across teams and measures, with fullest completion for sociodemographic data (99% on some measures) and poorest for DUP. The average London EIS client is male, single, unemployed and comes from Black or Minority Ethnic group. Most (70%) demonstrated poor social functioning at intake, over a third (38%) reported substance abuse problems and 23% had harmed themselves or others in the previous 6 months.


MiData provides a clinician-friendly system of evaluating first-episode psychosis services but requires further refinement and dedicated resources to improve completion rates. This method of collecting routine data is of use to clinicians, managers, health service researchers and commissioners and potentially it may enable naturalistic comparisons between different models of care.


first episode psychosis early intervention services audit outcome data feasibility 


  1. 1.
    Barnes TR, Mutsatsa SH, Hutton SB, Watt HC, Joyce EM (2006) Comorbid substance use and age at onset of schizophrenia. Br J Psychiatry 188:237–242PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Department of Health (2000) The NHS plan: a plan for investment, a plan for reform. Department of Health, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Department of Health (2001) The mental health policy implementation guide. Department of Health, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Department of Health (2005) Delivering race equality in mental health care. Department of Health, LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Department of Health (2006) Back into work, back into society: more social inclusion for people with mental health problems. Department of Health, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Drake RE, Mueser KT, McHugo GJ (1996) Clinician rating scales: alcohol use scale (AUS), drug use scale (DUS), and substance abuse treatment scale (SATS). In: Sederer LI, Dickery B (eds) Outcomes assessment in clinical practice. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, pp 113–116Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Endicott J, Spitzer RL, Fleiss JL, Cohen J (1976) The global assessment scale: a procedure for measuring overall severity of psychiatric disturbance. Arch Gen Psychiatry 33(6):766–771PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Garety PA, Craig TK, Dunn G, Fornells-Ambrojo M, Colbert S, Rahaman N, Read J, Power P (2006) Specialised care for early psychosis: symptoms, social functioning and patient satisfaction: randomised controlled trial. Br J Psychiatry 188:37–45PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gilbody S, House A, Sheldon T (2002) Psychiatrists do not use outcome measures. Br J Psychiatry 180:101–103PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gilbody SM, House AO, Sheldon TA (2002) Outcomes research in mental health. Br J Psychiatry 181:8–16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Harvey CA, Jeffreys SE, McNaught AS, Blizard RA, King MB (2007) The Camden Schizophrenia surveys. III: Five-year outcome of a sample of individuals from a prevalence survey and the importance of social relationships. Int J Soc Psychiatry 53(4):340–356PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kay SR, Opler LA, Fiszbein A (1992) Positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS): manual. Multi-Health Systems, Inc., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Leucht S, Kane JM, Kissling W, Harman J, Etschel E, Engel RR (2005) What does the PANSS mean? Schizophr Res 79:231–238PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lindenmayer JP, Grochowski S, Hyman RB (1995) Five factor model of schizophrenia: replication across samples. Schizophr Res 14(3):229–234PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Malla A, Norman R, Scholten D, Manchanda R, McLean T (2005) A community intervention for early identification of first episode psychosis: impact on duration of untreated psychosis (DUP) and patient characteristics. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 40(5):337–344PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Marshall M, Lockwood A, Lewis S, Fiander M (2004) Essential elements of an early intervention service: the opinion of expert clinicians. BMC Psychiatry 4:17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    National Institute for Mental Health Evaluation (2005) Minimum fidelity standards for new EIP services. NIMHE, North East, Yorkshire and Humber, UKGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Overall JE, Gorham DR (1988). The brief psychiatric rating scale (BPRS): recent developments in ascertainment and scaling. Psychopharmacol Bull 24:97–99Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Platz C, Umbricht DS, Cattapan-Ludewig K, Dvorsky D, Arbach D, Brenner HD, Simon AE (2006) Help-seeking pathways in early psychosis. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 41(12): 967–974PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Preston NJ, Stirling ML, Perera K, Bell RJ, Harrison TJ, Whitworth L, Castle DJ (2003) A statewide evaluation system for early psychosis. Aust N Z J Psychiatry 37:421–428PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Priebe S, McCabe R, Bullenkamp J, Hansson L, Rossler W, Torres-Gonzalez E, Wiersma D (2002) The impact of routine outcome measurement on treatment processes in community mental health care: approach and methods of the MECCA study. Epidemiol Psichiatr Soc 11(3): 198–205PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rosenheck RA, Fontanna A, Stolar M (1999) Assessing quality of care: administrative indicators and clinical outcomes in post traumatic stress disorder. Med Care 37:180–188PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Salokangas RKR (1997) Living situation, social network and outcome in schizophrenia: a five-year prospective follow-up study. Acta Psychiatr Scand 96:459–468PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Singh SP, Cooper J, Fisher HL, Tarrant CJ, Lloyd T, Banjo J, Corfe S, Jones P (2005) Determining the chronology and components of psychosis onset: the Nottingham Onset Schedule (NOS). Schizophr Res 80(1):117–130PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Singh SP, Fisher HL (2005) Early intervention in psychosis: obstacles and opportunities. Adv Psychiatr Treat 11:71–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tait L, Birchwood M, Trower P (2002) A new scale (SES) to measure engagement with community mental health services. J Mental Health 11(2):191–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Thornicroft G, Slade M (2000) Are routine outcome measures feasible in mental health? Qual Health Care 9(2):84PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Thorup A, Petersen L, Jeppesen P, Øhlenschlaeger J, Christensen T, Krarup G, JØrgensen P, Nordentoft M (2006) Social network among young adults with first-episode schizophrenia spectrum disorders: results from the Danish OPUS trial. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 41:761–770PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Young RC, Biggs JT, Ziegler VE, Meyer DA (1978) A rating scale for mania: reliability, validity and sensitivity. Br J Psychiatry 133:429-435PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Helen Fisher
    • 1
  • Kate Theodore
    • 2
  • Paddy Power
    • 3
  • Brock Chisholm
    • 4
  • Jo Fuller
    • 5
  • Karl Marlowe
    • 6
  • Katherine J. Aitchison
    • 7
  • Raj Tanna
    • 8
  • John Joyce
    • 9
  • Maxine Sacks
    • 10
  • Thomas Craig
    • 11
  • Sonia Johnson
    • 12
  1. 1.Institute of PsychiatryPO80 MRC SGDP CentreLondonUK
  2. 2.Dept. of PsychologyRoyal Holloway University of LondonEghamUK
  3. 3.Lambeth Early Onset Service, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation TrustLambeth HospitalLondonUK
  4. 4.ETHOS, Springfield HospitalLondonUK
  5. 5.STEPLondonUK
  6. 6.THEIS, St Clement’s HospitalLondonUK
  7. 7.COAST, Westways Resource CentreWest CroydonUK
  8. 8.KCW EIS, Paterson Centre for Mental HealthLondonUK
  9. 9.Lewisham EISLondonUK
  10. 10.EQUIP, City and Hackney Centre for Mental HealthLondonUK
  11. 11.PO33 David Goldberg Centre, Institute of PsychiatryLondonUK
  12. 12.Dept. of Mental Health SciencesUniversity College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations