Do early intervention services for psychosis maintain their effects after transition to usual/modular care? A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Early intervention services (EIS) for psychosis have demonstrated superiority to usual care/modular care (UC/MC) until the end of their delivery. However, the maintenance effects of EIS care after transition to UC/MC are less clear. We aimed to compare these effects vs. UC/MC at least one year after the end of EIS care. This PRISMA and MOOSE-compliant systematic review searched PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO and Web of Science databases and Cochrane Central Register of Reviews, without time or language restrictions. We included studies initially designed as randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing EIS vs. UC/MC in patients with early-phase psychosis, in which both the intervention and control groups were followed for at least 12 months after cessation of EIS care in the intervention group. Co-primary outcomes were psychiatric hospitalization, duration of hospitalization, and drop-out at the end of follow-up (preferably 5 years post-EIS initiation). Secondary outcomes were severity of total, positive and negative symptoms; quality of life, work involvement, remission, legal offences, antipsychotic use, and suicide attempts. We meta-analyzed six RCTs with data from 13 papers, including 1,416 individuals (mean age: 23.9 years, females: 36.7%). After 2-3 years of receiving UC/MC, subsequent to 2-3 years of EIS care or UC/MC, individuals who originally received EIS care spent less days hospitalized than those continuing UC/MC (n=5, standardized mean difference, SMD=0.128, 95% CI: 0.019-0.237, p=0.021). However, although we confirmed the superiority of EIS care to UC/MC at the end of the intervention period (except for work involvement and legal offences), the two groups did not differ significantly at 2-3 years post-EIS care regarding hospitalization, all-cause drop-out, quality of life; severity of total, positive and negative symptoms; work involvement, remission, legal offences, antipsychotic use, and suicide attempts. In summary, EIS care did not maintain its superiority over UC/MC 2-3 years after its cessation across meta-analyzable outcomes, except for duration of hospitalizations. These results support the need to further develop and potentially extend full or individualized EIS delivery.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
World Psychiatry
Published
2026-01-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.70012
Primary Topic
Schizophrenia research and treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Do early intervention services for psychosis maintain their effects after transition to usual/modular care? A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Delbert G. Robinson, M. Nordentoft, Vinod H. Srihari, A. Catalan et al.
World Psychiatry
Schizophrenia research and treatment
article

Do early intervention services for psychosis maintain their effects after transition to usual/modular care? A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Delbert G. Robinson, M. Nordentoft, Vinod H. Srihari, A. Catalan, Marie Stefanie Kejser Starzer, M. Rogdaki, Clàudia Aymerich, E. Chen, J. Camacho, Jose Suarez Campayo, Nina R Schooler, Celso Arango, Gonzalo Salazar de Pablo, Nikolai Albert, Philip McGuire, John Kane, Christoph U. Correll, Joao Almeida, Wing‐Chung Chang, Marcelo Valencia, Carsten Hjorthøj, Mihai Pop
article en

Abstract

Early intervention services (EIS) for psychosis have demonstrated superiority to usual care/modular care (UC/MC) until the end of their delivery. However, the maintenance effects of EIS care after transition to UC/MC are less clear. We aimed to compare these effects vs. UC/MC at least one year after the end of EIS care. This PRISMA and MOOSE-compliant systematic review searched PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO and Web of Science databases and Cochrane Central Register of Reviews, without time or language restrictions. We included studies initially designed as randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing EIS vs. UC/MC in patients with early-phase psychosis, in which both the intervention and control groups were followed for at least 12 months after cessation of EIS care in the intervention group. Co-primary outcomes were psychiatric hospitalization, duration of hospitalization, and drop-out at the end of follow-up (preferably 5 years post-EIS initiation). Secondary outcomes were severity of total, positive and negative symptoms; quality of life, work involvement, remission, legal offences, antipsychotic use, and suicide attempts. We meta-analyzed six RCTs with data from 13 papers, including 1,416 individuals (mean age: 23.9 years, females: 36.7%). After 2-3 years of receiving UC/MC, subsequent to 2-3 years of EIS care or UC/MC, individuals who originally received EIS care spent less days hospitalized than those continuing UC/MC (n=5, standardized mean difference, SMD=0.128, 95% CI: 0.019-0.237, p=0.021). However, although we confirmed the superiority of EIS care to UC/MC at the end of the intervention period (except for work involvement and legal offences), the two groups did not differ significantly at 2-3 years post-EIS care regarding hospitalization, all-cause drop-out, quality of life; severity of total, positive and negative symptoms; work involvement, remission, legal offences, antipsychotic use, and suicide attempts. In summary, EIS care did not maintain its superiority over UC/MC 2-3 years after its cessation across meta-analyzable outcomes, except for duration of hospitalizations. These results support the need to further develop and potentially extend full or individualized EIS delivery.

World PsychiatryVol. 25(1)
University of Copenhagen (DK), Feinstein Institute for Medical Research (US), Hofstra University (US), Nanyang Technological University (SG), SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University (US), King's College London (GB), South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (GB), University of Pavia (IT), Mental Health Services (DK), The Francis Crick Institute (GB), East London NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Copenhagen University Hospital (DK), Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón (ES), Hospital Clínico San Carlos (ES), Yale University (US), University of Oxford (GB), BioCruces Health research Institute (ES), Tecnológico Nacional de México (MX), Hospital de Basurto (ES), Hong Kong Virtual University (CN), Institute of Mental Health (SG), Zucker Hillside Hospital (US), Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE), Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE), University of Hong Kong (HK)
Openalex Percentile: Top 87%
Schizophrenia research and treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.