Peer Reviewed
1
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
1-12-2017
Keywords
Psychosis, Remission, Recovery, First-episode, Systematic Review, Adult.
Abstract
Background: Remission and recovery rates for people with first-episode psychosis (FEP) remain uncertain.
Aims: To assess pooled prevalence rates of remission and recovery in FEP and to investigate potential moderators.
Method: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess pooled prevalence rates of remission and recovery in FEP in longitudinal studies with more than 1 year of follow-up data, and conducted meta-regression analyses to investigate potential moderators.
Results: Seventy-nine studies were included representing 19072 patients with FEP. The pooled rate of remission among 12301 individuals with FEP was 58% (60 studies, mean follow-up 5.5 years). Higher remission rates were moderated by studies from more recent years. The pooled prevalence of recovery among 9642 individuals with FEP was 38% (35 studies, mean follow-up 7.2 years). Recovery rates were higher in North America than in other regions.
Conclusions: Remission and recovery rates in FEP may be more favourable than previously thought. We observed stability of recovery rates after the first 2 years, suggesting that a progressive deteriorating course of illness is not typical. Although remission rates have improved over time recovery rates have not, raising questions about the effectiveness of services in achieving improved recovery.
Disciplines
Medicine and Health Sciences | Psychiatry and Psychology
Citation
Lally J, Ajnakina O, Stubbs B, Cullinane M, Murphy KC, Gaughran F, Murray RM. Remission and recovery from first-episode psychosis in adults: systematic review and meta-analysis of long-term outcome studies. British Journal of Psychiatry. 2017;211(6):350-358
PubMed ID
28982659
Link to this item at
https://epubs.rcsi.ie/psychart/73
DOI Link
10.1192/bjp.bp.117.201475
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 License.
Comments
This is an author-produced electronic version of an article accepted for publication in the British Journal of Psychiatry. The definitive publisher-authenticated version is available online at http://bjp.rcpsych.org