TY - JOUR
T1 - Family functioning moderates the impact of psychosis-risk symptoms on social and role functioning
AU - Thompson, Elizabeth
AU - Rakhshan, Pamela
AU - Pitts, Steven C.
AU - Demro, Caroline
AU - Millman, Zachary B.
AU - Bussell, Kristin
AU - DeVylder, Jordan
AU - Kline, Emily
AU - Reeves, Gloria M.
AU - Schiffman, Jason
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by the National Institute of Mental Health (grant R01MH112612 to J.S.) and the United States, State of Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Behavioral Health Administration through the Center for Excellence on Early Intervention for Serious Mental Illness (OPASS# 14-13717G/M00B4400241 to J.S.).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018
PY - 2019/2
Y1 - 2019/2
N2 - Background: Youth at clinical high-risk (CHR) for psychosis often experience difficulties in social and role functioning. Given evidence that family stress and support can impact psychosis-risk symptoms, as well as an individual's ability to fulfill social and role functions, family dynamics are hypothesized to moderate the effect of psychosis-risk symptoms on functioning. Methods: Participants at CHR (N = 52) completed the clinician-administered Structured Interview for Psychosis-risk Syndromes (SIPS) and the Family Assessment Device (FAD) General Functioning Scale, a self-report measure of family functioning including cohesion and support. Interviewers rated participants’ current social and role functioning using the Global Functioning: Social and Role Scales. Results: Regression results indicated that positive symptoms, but not ratings of family functioning, statistically predicted social and role functioning. Perceived family functioning, however, moderated the effect of symptoms on social/role functioning. For individuals who perceived lower levels of family functioning, symptoms were moderately associated with social and role functioning (f 2 = 0.17 and f 2 = 0.23, respectively). In contrast, psychosis-risk symptoms were not significantly associated with social/role functioning for individuals with higher levels of perceived family functioning. Notably, positive symptoms and perceived family functioning were not associated with one another, suggesting that perceived family functioning did not directly impact symptom severity, or vice versa. Conclusions: Findings support the notion that family functioning may be a clinically meaningful factor for individuals at CHR. Although this cross-sectional data limits our discussion of potential mechanisms underlying the pattern of findings, results suggest that familial support may be beneficial for individuals at risk for psychosis.
AB - Background: Youth at clinical high-risk (CHR) for psychosis often experience difficulties in social and role functioning. Given evidence that family stress and support can impact psychosis-risk symptoms, as well as an individual's ability to fulfill social and role functions, family dynamics are hypothesized to moderate the effect of psychosis-risk symptoms on functioning. Methods: Participants at CHR (N = 52) completed the clinician-administered Structured Interview for Psychosis-risk Syndromes (SIPS) and the Family Assessment Device (FAD) General Functioning Scale, a self-report measure of family functioning including cohesion and support. Interviewers rated participants’ current social and role functioning using the Global Functioning: Social and Role Scales. Results: Regression results indicated that positive symptoms, but not ratings of family functioning, statistically predicted social and role functioning. Perceived family functioning, however, moderated the effect of symptoms on social/role functioning. For individuals who perceived lower levels of family functioning, symptoms were moderately associated with social and role functioning (f 2 = 0.17 and f 2 = 0.23, respectively). In contrast, psychosis-risk symptoms were not significantly associated with social/role functioning for individuals with higher levels of perceived family functioning. Notably, positive symptoms and perceived family functioning were not associated with one another, suggesting that perceived family functioning did not directly impact symptom severity, or vice versa. Conclusions: Findings support the notion that family functioning may be a clinically meaningful factor for individuals at CHR. Although this cross-sectional data limits our discussion of potential mechanisms underlying the pattern of findings, results suggest that familial support may be beneficial for individuals at risk for psychosis.
KW - Attenuated psychosis
KW - Clinical high risk
KW - Family support
KW - Functioning
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053019814&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85053019814&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.schres.2018.08.035
DO - 10.1016/j.schres.2018.08.035
M3 - Article
C2 - 30205908
AN - SCOPUS:85053019814
SN - 0920-9964
VL - 204
SP - 337
EP - 342
JO - Schizophrenia Research
JF - Schizophrenia Research
ER -