Nonadherence to antipsychotic medication is highly prevalent in patients with schizophrenia and has a deleterious impact on the course of the illness. This review seeks to determine the interventions that were examined in the past decade to improve adherence rates.

The literature between 2000 and 2009 was searched for randomized controlled trials which compared a psychosocial intervention with another intervention or with treatment as usual in patients with schizophrenia.

Fifteen studies were identified, with a large heterogeneity in design, adherence measures and outcome variables. Interventions that offered more sessions during a longer period of time, and especially those with a continuous focus on adherence, seem most likely to be successful, as well as pragmatic interventions that focus on attention and memory problems. The positive effects of adapted forms of Motivational Interviewing found in earlier studies, such as compliance therapy, have not been confirmed.

Nonadherence remains a challenging problem in schizophrenia. The heterogeneity of factors related to nonadherence calls for individually tailored approaches to promote adherence. More evidence is required to determine the effects of specific interventions.

Studies investigating indicators of recovery from schizophrenia yielded two concepts of recovery. The first is the reduction of psychiatric symptoms and functional disabilities (‘clinical recovery’), while the second describes the individual adaptation process to the threat posed to the individual sense of self by the disorder and its negative consequences (‘personal recovery’). Evidence suggests that both perceptions contribute substantially to the understanding of recovery and require specific assessment and therapy. While current reviews of measures of clinical recovery exist, measures of personal recovery have yet to be investigated. Considering the steadily growing literature on recovery, this article gives an update about existing measures assessing personal recovery.

A literature search for instruments was performed using Medline, Embase, PsycINFO&PSYNDEXPlus, ISI Web of Knowledge, and Cochrane Library. Inclusion criteria were: (1) quantitative self-report measures; (2) specifically developed for adults with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder or at least applied to individuals suffering from severe mental illness; (3) empirically tested psychometric properties and/or published in a peer-reviewed, English-language journal. Instruments were evaluated with regard to psychometric properties (validity and reliability) and issues of application (user and administrator friendliness, translations).

Thirteen instruments met the inclusion criteria. They were individually described and finally summarized in a table reflecting the pros and cons of each instrument. This may enable the reader to make an evidence-based choice for a questionnaire for a specific application.

The Recovery Assessment Scale is possibly the best currently available measure of personal recovery when all evaluation criteria are included. However, the ratings listed in the current paper depended on the availability of information and the quality of available reports of previous assessment of the measurement properties. Considering the significant amount of information lacking and inconsistent findings, further research on the reviewed measures is perhaps more important than the development of new measures of personal recovery.

Physical co-morbidity including type 2 diabetes mellitus is more prevalent in patients with schizophrenia compared to the general population. However, there is little consistent evidence that co-morbidity with diabetes mellitus and/or other diseases leads to excess mortality in schizophrenia. Thus, we investigated whether co-morbidity with diabetes and other somatic diseases is increased in schizophrenics, and if these are equally or more relevant predictors of mortality in schizophrenia than in age- and gender-matched hospitalised controls.

During 2000–2007, 679 patients with schizophrenia were admitted to University Hospital Birmingham NHS Trust. Co-morbidities were compared with 88,778 age- and gender group-matched hospital controls. Predictors of mortality were identified using forward Cox regression models.

The prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus was increased in schizophrenia compared to hospitalised controls (11.3% versus 6.3%). The initial prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus was significantly higher in the 100 later deceased schizophrenic patients (24.0%) than in those 579 surviving over 7 years (9.2%). Predictors of mortality in schizophrenia were found to be age (relative risk [RR] = 1.1/year), type 2 diabetes mellitus (RR = 2.2), pneumonia (RR = 2.7), heart failure (RR = 2.9) and chronic renal failure (RR = 3.2). The impact of diabetes mellitus on mortality was significantly higher in schizophrenia than in hospital controls (RR = 2.2 versus RR = 1.1). In agreement, deceased schizophrenics had significantly suffered more diabetes mellitus than deceased controls (24.0 versus 10.5%). The relative risks of mortality for other disorders and their prevalence in later deceased subjects did not significantly differ between schizophrenia and controls.

Schizophrenics have more and additionally suffer more from diabetes: co-morbidity with diabetes mellitus is increased in schizophrenia in comparison with hospital controls; type 2 diabetes mellitus causes significant excess mortality in schizophrenia. Thus, monitoring for and prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus is of utmost relevance in hospitalised patients with schizophrenia.

The Eiffel study is a longitudinal, naturalistic study of patients with first episode psychosis (FEP) designed to evaluate the predictive value of defective insight on treatment adherence and global functioning.

Five hundred seventy-seven patients with FEP were assessed at baseline and at a 1-year follow-up. They were compared in terms of sociodemographic factors, psychopathology, insight, treatment adherence and functional outcome. Longitudinal functionality was prospectively assessed with the clinical global impression (CGI) and global assessment of functioning (GAF) rating scales.

At baseline, up to 50% of our sample presented with a lack of insight. Most clinical symptoms, including insight, improved over the follow-up period. Insight, education and social withdrawal significantly predicted CGI and GAF at follow-up. Insight and level of education were predictive of treatment adherence.

Insight significantly predicted the general clinical course, treatment adherence and functional outcome in our FEP sample after 1 year. Only education additionally accounted for the longitudinal course. Since our results suggest that better insight improves treatment adherence and consequently clinical course and functional outcome, insight could be a specific target of treatment in early intervention programs.

There is evidence that psycho-education courses for caregivers of individuals with schizophrenia improve the short-term outcome of the condition. However, most of the outcome studies are limited to two-year follow-up.

This study is a five-year retrospective case-control follow-up of an original cohort of 63 patients and their 101 caregivers who completed a six-week Caregiver Psycho-education Programme (CPP) for schizophrenia and psychosis between 2002 and 2005, and 60 controls, matched for age, gender and severity of their psychotic illness.

Patients whose caregivers learned more from the six-week psycho-education course had a significantly longer time to relapse (P = 0.04) and a significantly shorter length of stay during their first relapse (P < 0.05). Patients whose caregivers attended the six-week psycho-education course (regardless of how much the caregivers learned) had a significantly better outcome than controls. This included a significantly smaller number of relapses (P < 0.01), longer time to relapse (P < 0.01), shorter length of stay during their first relapse (P < 0.01) and smaller number of bed days over five years (P < 0.01). The odds ratio of controls relapsing, although insignificant at one year, was 4.13 (1.85–9.21) at five years. Outcome was not affected by either the numbers of caregivers attending for each patient, or caregiver gender.

This study, which is among the first to examine outcome over five years, supports the efficacy of psycho-education for caregivers in improving outcome for patients. Caregivers should be encouraged to take up psycho-education where it is available.