This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an eLetter
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by WARNER, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by WARNER, R.
The British Journal of Psychiatry (2005) 187: s104-s107
© 2005 The Royal College of Psychiatrists

SPECIAL ARTICLES

Problems with early and very early intervention in psychosis*

RICHARD WARNER, MB, DPM

Mental Health Center of Boulder County and University of Colorado; Mental Health Center of Boulder County, 1333 Iris Avenue, Boulder, Colorado 80304, USA. Tel: +01 303 443 8500; fax: +01 303 449 6029

Correspondence: e-mail: drdickwarner{at}aol.com

Declaration of interest. None.

* Paper presented at the Third International Early Psychosis Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark, September 2002.

‘Earlyintervention’ can refer to two different approaches – intervention when the psychosis is already evident and intervention before a psychosis is fully apparent. Each carries a distinctly different set of risks. The hoped-for benefits of early intervention in a fully evident psychosis are based on research that reveals an association between intervention early in the illness and good outcome.Those suffering from a psychosis of recent onset, however, are more likely to experience a spontaneous remission of illness, and this may readily explain the observed association. Early intervention in such cases of good-prognosis psychosis may lead to unnecessary and, sometimes, protracted treatment for those who would do well with no treatment. Intervention in the supposed prodromal phase of psychosis presents more serious hazards. The screening instruments currently available are inadequate for the accurate prediction of psychosis, and the risks of negative effects for the large numbers of people who screen false-positive are considerable. These risks include unnecessary fear of illness, restriction of life goals, use of medication and their side-effects.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br. J. PsychiatryHome page
C. MORGAN, R. ABDUL-AL, J. M. LAPPIN, P. JONES, P. FEARON, M. LEESE, T. CROUDACE, K. MORGAN, P. DAZZAN, T. CRAIG, et al.
Clinical and social determinants of duration of untreated psychosis in the AeSOP first-episode psychosis study
The British Journal of Psychiatry, November 1, 2006; 189(5): 446 - 452.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]