In order to protect participant confidentiality the vignette is a composite interview and any identifying information was altered. Clinical Vignette: Alicia is a sixteen- year old Latina female who was brought in by both parents upon the suggestion of their daughter’s therapist. The therapist has been seeing Alicia for six months for generalized anxiety and angry outbursts starting shortly after her parents divorced. The therapist reports that the divorce, although amicable, was stressful for Alicia and her younger brother. The therapist was concerned about an increase in Alicia’s anxiety and depression symptoms and a recent emergence of odd ideas that familiar people had changed in some way. The therapist was unsure what to make of Alicia’s new concerns and wondered if Alicia was exaggerating her level of distress in order to get both parents more involved or merely coping poorly in reaction to changes in the family. In session with her therapist, Alicia reported that at times, her surroundings would seem “unreal” but could not elaborate further. Over the past six months, Alicia became withdrawn and more “stressed” about what her friends think of her. Thoughts that people are communicating with her in special ways are increasingly preoccupying. Parents report that up until three months ago, Alicia performed well academically, receiving B’s, and socialized daily with several close friends from her soccer team. However, Alicia now has trouble completing assignments and is at risk of failing one class. She has missed several soccer practices in a row and comes straight home from school instead of hanging out with friends. At the PART appointment, Alicia was well-groomed and dressed appropriately for her age. There were no signs of psychomotor retardation; however, she exhibited moderate tension . Alicia was engaged throughout the interview and maintained good eye contact,marijuana curing except during the times when discussing her sadness over her parents’ divorce. She appeared depressed and anxious.
She denied suicidal and homicidal ideations. She answered questions spontaneously and directly, although she spoke softly throughout the conversation, particularly when mentioning current unhappiness. Alicia’s thought process was linear and coherent. Alicia was able to answer questions and recall her past without difficulties. When questioned about her depression and anxiety, Alicia reported that she was having “a hard time” and that she found therapy helpful. A fictionalized excerpt from the initial interview transcript is as follows. A discussion of confidentiality is omitted for purposes of brevity, but it always included, as is a parallel interview with parents, legal guardian or other informant. These symptoms were rated in the attenuated range, with a 4 rating on unusual thought content. The rating is based on Alicia’s endorsement of puzzlement and confusion regarding familiar people, feeling that others had changed and ideas of reference . These thoughts are unanticipated and are experienced as not within Alicia’s control. Alicia reports that she is 50% sure that the experiences she’s having are real and that these thoughts are compelling, preoccupying, distressing. These thoughts are also getting in the way of school and socializing with friends. Given that these experiences started within the past year , occur at least once per week and cause daily distress, these symptoms qualify for an APS syndrome on the SIPS/SOPS. The case illustrates that symptoms develop over time, becoming progressively worse over the course of a year. Alicia’s thoughts that her friends might be imposters or that she is receiving special messages from strangers are compelling but skepticism about the reality of these ideas remains intact. She realizes that this is not really happening, but at times, for example, when she is at the mall with friends, the thought is overwhelming and she must get home to feel calmer. In the interview, Alicia readily provided an alternative explanation for these experiences with minimal prompting from the examiner. Many clinicians might consider these symptoms to be fully psychotic, and would not ask questions to determine her level of conviction . The advent of the SIPS and CAARMS has set an arbitrary threshold to full psychotic intensity of symptoms that was never defined in DSM-IV , and may differ from the threshold set by clinicians in typical practice.
Key determinants of a symptom being at a fully psychotic level of intensity on the SIPS are full conviction regarding the externally generated nature of the symptoms well as the frequency and duration of symptoms. Although the SIPS provides a definition that can be clearly operationalized and applied reliably, future research should examine the validity of the psychosis threshold for purposes of defining risk and outcome . Psychosis risk assessment does not end with the completion of the SIPS or CAARMS. Communicating the results of the assessment is an opportunity to provide psychoeducation, manage anxiety and give adolescents and families hope. As is always the case in clinical work, it is often helpful to use the teen’s language to describe the symptoms in defining the risk syndrome . Similar to all diagnostic feedback, basic education includes a brief summary of the available evidence: definition of the diagnosis, basic etiology, and prognosis of risk rates, highlighting the importance of early intervention and recommending treatments. When families are given information they gain perspective and a greater sense of control over emerging changes that may otherwise be puzzling and disruptive. Feedback may require more than one visit as families can only take in a small amount of information at a time, especially under a high emotional load. This often requires a careful balance between giving sufficient information about risk without increasing the family’s anxiety about their adolescent’s current symptoms. Informing families of the actual risk can alleviate the doom families may feel. At the same time, it is important to communicate to families that addressing symptoms in the early stages may prevent further decline in functioning regardless of the diagnostic outcome. In order to support treatment engagement, it is important to process these reactions with the family while addressing misconceptions and stigma through an accurate and hopeful portrayal of attenuated psychotic symptoms, and of established psychosis. Family members consistently report that before a risk assessment they were not sure what to make of their child’s recent changes in behavior and mood; they often felt confused, not knowing whether to take the “wait and see approach” or seek professional advice: “At first I thought she was going through a phase. All teenagers go through some angst and get moody but it seemed like there was something more than that. I wasn’t sure.” Many families have historical experience with a relative with schizophrenia and fear that their child will experience a similarly devastating future of chronic institutionalization. For most people,pruning marijuana the words “psychosis” or “schizophrenia” can be stigmatizing labels. However, symptoms such as unusual perceptual experiences or thoughts are part of a continuum of normal experiences .
In describing the concept of a continuum to families, the example of social anxiety can be used. Social anxiety falls on a continuum where an adolescent can move from having a normative concern about what others think of him/her to less socially acceptable paranoid ideation. It is the interpretation of these experiences that causes distress or disability and these symptoms are amenable to psychological interventions used to treat depression and anxiety, such as CBT. However, normalization of the experience does not mean there is nothing to worry about.The presence of attenuated psychotic symptoms and their associated distress and impairment can be taxing for the adolescent’s family. We often recommend that families find their own support, such as individual therapy or a parent support group. CHR syndromes are often superimposed on pre-existing conditions, overlap to varying degrees with other disorders that are common in adolescence, and attenuated psychotic symptoms are often present across a variety of disorders. Therefore, accurately differentiating between CHR syndromes and other psychiatric problems might not be possible in the initial stages of disturbance, especially in younger patients. In order to minimize “false-negatives,” research studies typically follow individuals who present with attenuated psychotic symptoms and comorbid DSM-IV diagnosis longitudinally in order to ascertain eventual risk for conversion to psychosis. This ambiguity regarding diagnosis and outcome can be anxiety-provoking for clients and their families. Continual psycho education and feedback to families can help, and attenuated psychotic symptoms, as well as other symptoms the client presents with, should be targeted in treatment regardless of the formal diagnosis. We will now briefly consider common comorbid disorders and, where possible, differential diagnosis for CHR adolescents. Substance use and abuse are, of course, common among CHR youth and psychotic experiences are common in non-CHR individuals using substances . Similar to assessing any potential substance-induced disorder, the first task is to establish a time course, determining whether the attenuated psychotic symptoms are limited to periods of intoxication and withdrawal. Substance use can interact with underlying vulnerabilities to trigger attenuated and full psychosis, with accumulating evidence that early cannabis use may play such a role . However, without clear periods of attenuated psychotic symptoms outside of substance use, a CHR syndrome cannot be diagnosed. Drawing a timeline of attenuated psychotic symptoms and substance use with the patient can help clinicians make this distinction.Comorbidity between CHR syndromes and mood and anxiety disorders is high: 59% of CHR individuals are estimated to meet criteria for a mood disorder, and 28% to meet criteria for an anxiety disorder , consistent with retrospective reports of anxiety and depression before illness onset in psychotic populations . These mood and anxiety symptoms can be caused or aggravated by distress associated with attenuated psychotic symptoms, can emerge independently from attenuated psychotic symptoms, or the attenuated psychotic symptoms can mark the severity of the mood/anxiety syndromes. Additionally, there is evidence suggesting that CHR individuals with comorbid mood- and anxiety symptoms have worse outcomes longitudinally and an increased risk of transitioning to psychosis . Finally, readers should be reminded that mood disorders with psychotic features are a targeted outcome of the CHR syndrome; the definition of psychotic “conversion” is not limited to schizophrenia . Suspected attenuated psychotic symptoms which co-occur with mood- and anxiety disorders need to be assessed along the dimensions of onset, frequency, impairment, conviction and distress just as would be the case if these symptoms occur without comorbid symptomatology. Children and adolescents diagnosed with Pervasive Development Disorders can present with social impairments, disorganized thought and speech, blunted affect and constricted interests which are also common in adolescents diagnosed with CHR syndromes. There is evidence suggesting that individuals with PDD have a higher risk of developing psychosis than individuals who do not meet criteria for PDD , and some studies report significant comorbidity between PDD and CHR syndromes . In some cases, PDD can be differentiated from CHR syndromes by developmental history: pervasive developmental disorders have an early onset , and are stable over time. In contrast, CHR syndromes often emerge in adolescence or early adulthood, and are diagnosed after a period of increased symptoms and a deterioration of functioning compared to baseline. However, the expression of PDD symptoms can change in adolescence, with what can appear to be “odd ideas” compared to peers . Furthermore, determining the absence or presence of CHR syndromes in individuals with a low IQ using traditional interview methods might be unreliable , and this needs to be considered when diagnosing CHR syndromes in those with PDD. There is compelling evidence from our group and others that characteristics related to how a person reacts to alcohol earlier in life correlates with the later development of heavy drinking, alcohol-related problems, and risk for alcohol use disorders . These include our own low level of response model , Newlin and Thomson’s Differentiator Model , and King’s Modified Differentiator Model . In our own work the less intense alcohol response at rising and peak alcohol levels is supported by a host of hormonal and electrophysiological data , with fMRI responses indicating potential LR group differences in some cognitive processes . However, despite the robust correlation between the intensity of one’s reaction to alcohol and the subsequent development of alcohol-related problems, it is not known if the level of response relates to another well-established phenomenon, tolerance.