IEPA 11

Does the evidence support having Early Intervention (EI) teams which cover wider diagnoses and age groups, or does it still only squarely support having discrete early intervention teams for young people with first episodes of psychosis? Meanwhile, triage and initial counselling services as a "one-stop-shop" or "clearing house" for assessing and assisting with all mental health disorders in young people, or exploratory programs for EI's of other disorders and other age-groups may be promising. However, they require further evaluation at this stage, for evidence of better outcomes. Should we enhance and resource EIP teams for young people to allocate a minority of extra places (say 10-15%) for severe high intensity disorders of a wider spectrum of psychiatric diagnoses which require a similar approach (as for psychosis) whether in ultra high risk states, acute early episodes requiring intensive mobile community care and assertive rehabilitative/recovery work? eg major affective disorders, disabling anxiety states, and severe eating disorders. This would not denature the clinical and functional teamwork protocols, and therefore should not diminish outcomes for first episode psychoses. Further, should trauma specific care be provided in common to most severe disorders? These approaches are consistent with Rosen, McGorry, Byrne and Goldstone chapter in Tasman A et al, eds, “Psychiatry” current 4th edition textbook, Wiley, 2016, on early Intervention across multiple disorders and age-groups, Byrne & Rosen, eds, "Early Intervention in Psychiatry : EI of nearly everything for better mental health" Blackwell-Wiley, 2014, and McGorry, EI: Mission Cramp Vs Mission Creep, ANZJP, 50, 11:1033-1035.