We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The evolution of psychosocial treatments for schizophrenia has tracked larger historical trends in psychology, behavioral science, and mental health policy over more than a century. At times, the communication of ideas and influences of science, practice and policy has been reciprocal and mutually beneficial. At other times, there is a lack of such reciprocity, sometimes with unfortunate consequences. This chapter reviews and summarizes those ideas and influences in our post-modern era, and identifies key landmarks in the progression toward contemporary psychosocial treatment of schizophrenia spectrum disorders.
Schizoaffective disorder and schizophrenia are common presentations to psychiatry services. Research to date has focussed on hypothesised biological differences between these two disorders. Little is known about possible variations in admission patterns. Our study compared demographic and clinical features of patients admitted voluntarily and involuntarily with diagnoses of schizoaffective disorder or schizophrenia to three psychiatry admission units in Ireland.
Methods:
We studied all admissions to three acute psychiatry units in Ireland for periods between 1 January 2008 and 31 December 2018. We recorded demographic and clinical variables for all admissions. Voluntary and involuntary admissions of patients with schizoaffective disorder were compared to those with schizophrenia.
Results:
We studied 5581 admissions to the study units for varying periods between January 2008 and December 2018, covering a total of 1 976 154 person-years across the 3 catchment areas. The 3 study areas had 218.8, 145.5 and 411.2 admissions per 100 000 person-years, respectively. Of the 5581 admissions over the study periods, schizoaffective disorder accounted for 5% (n = 260) and schizophrenia for 17% (n = 949). Admissions with schizoaffective disorder were significantly more likely to be female and older, and less likely to have involuntary admission status, compared to those with schizophrenia. As first admissions were not distinguished from re-admissions in this dataset, these findings merit further study.
Conclusions:
Admissions with a schizoaffective disorder differ significantly from those with schizophrenia, being, in particular, less likely to be involuntary admissions. This suggests that psychotic symptoms might be a stronger driver of involuntary psychiatry admission than affective symptoms.
Minority ethnic and migrant groups face an elevated risk of compulsory admission for mental illness. There are overlapping cultural, socio-demographic, and structural explanations for this risk that require further investigation.
Methods
By linking Swedish national register data, we established a cohort of persons first diagnosed with a psychotic disorder between 2001 and 2016. We used multilevel mixed-effects logistic modelling to investigate variation in compulsory admission at first diagnosis of psychosis across migrant and Swedish-born groups with individual and neighbourhood-level covariates.
Results
Our cohort included 12 000 individuals, with 1298 (10.8%) admitted compulsorily. In an unadjusted model, being a migrant [odds ratio (OR) 1.48; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.26–1.73] or child of a migrant (OR 1.27; 95% CI 1.10–1.47) increased risk of compulsory admission. However after multivariable modelling, region-of-origin provided a better fit to the data than migrant status; excess risk of compulsory admission was elevated for individuals from sub-Saharan African (OR 1.94; 95% CI 1.51–2.49), Middle Eastern and North African (OR 1.46; 95% CI 1.17–1.81), non-Nordic European (OR 1.27; 95% CI 1.01–1.61), and mixed Swedish-Nordic backgrounds (OR 1.33; 95% CI 1.03–1.72). Risk of compulsory admission was greater in more densely populated neighbourhoods [OR per standard deviation (s.d.) increase in the exposure: 1.12, 95% CI 1.06–1.18], an effect that appeared to be driven by own-region migrant density (OR per s.d. increase in exposure: 1.12; 95% CI 1.02–1.24).
Conclusions
Inequalities in the risk of compulsory admission by migrant status, region-of-origin, urban living and own-region migrant density highlight discernible factors which raise barriers to equitable care and provide potential targets for intervention.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.