European Psychiatry - Volume 41 - April 2017

789 / 916

25th European Congress of Psychiatry / European Psychiatry 41S (2017) S772–S846 S785
statistical differences reported as well as in the overall life quality
level as in its compound factors for both groups. The same result
applies for the gender differences.
Disclosure of interest The authors have not supplied their decla-
ration of competing interest.
EV1168
Quality of life at work and motivation
for research activities for residents of
general practice in two different
surgical departments in Greece
I. Christodoulou ∗, K. Apostolou , G. Kazantzi ,
E. Xenodoxidou , C. Pogonidis , D. Babalis
1 G. Papanikolaou General Hospital- Thessaloniki-greece, B’surgical
Department, Thessaloniki, Greece
2 Democritus University Of Thrace- Greece, Master Program In The
Health And Safety In The Workplace, Alexandroupolis, Greece
3 Sismanoglion Hospital, Surgical Department, Komotini, Thrace,
Greece
∗ Corresponding author.
Introduction Quality of life at work has verymuch to dowith edu-
cational efforts duringmedical residence years. Constant changes of
work environment for general practice residents, is a strong reason
for high levels of stress at work.
Objectives Our study is to present the general rules of work for
general practice residents in surgical departments in Greece and
the quality of their lives and career motivation.
Methods We use information coming from two hospitals, a large
city hospital which covers a population of 780.000 of citizens during
all-night duties, and a provincial hospital, which covers a popula-
tion of 50.000 citizens.
Results In both workplaces, general practice residents spend
much of their education time in the emergencies department or
the outpatient clinics of surgery. Stress is more intense in the
large hospital, based on the number of patients examined per
day and the frustration they receive at work. However, the heavy
duty to accompany a patient for a transfer to other hospital is
much more often in province, and then the stress is much more
intense and lasting. Frustration is also often in the urban hospital
where the residents of various specialties are more experienced
and have more confidence due to their departments expertise.
Satisfaction at work varies according to the personality of every
doctor.
Conclusions Opportunities for scientific development through
participation in scientific meetings was stronger in the provincial
Hospital due to a good team of strongly motivated researchers that
happened to be there and better work environment.
Disclosure of interest The authors have not supplied their decla-
ration of competing interest.
EV1169
First episode psychosis service (EPS):
Evaluation of implementation in a
rural Australian setting
D. Roy
The Prince Charles Hospital Metro North Health Services, Acute Care
Team, Department of Psychiatry, Chermside, Australia
Introduction Recent decades, has seen an increasing focus on
developing specific early or first episode psychosis services, in var-
ious parts of the world. There has been a growing awareness of
the emotional impact of psychosis like trauma at onset, suicide and
loss of social network. There is also a co relational link between
the duration of untreated psychosis (DUP) and outcomes. The first
2–3 years following first episode onset have been argued to be a
critical period for treatment.
Method Our studywas an evaluation of an early psychosis service
(EPS) in a rural Australian MHS ‘experiencing’ or ‘at risk’ of expe-
riencing first episode psychosis. The guidelines were based on the
Australian clinical guidelines for early psychosis (1998). The audit
tool used was a checklist based on 10 treatment guidelines devel-
oped by the EPS special interest group evaluation sub-committee.
Results The overall results show that 7 out of the 10 treatment
guidelines were well adhered throughout the implementation pro-
cess. Guidelines strongly adhered to were numbers 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8,
and 10, whereas guidelines 1, 4, and 9 were poorly adhered to.
Discussion The implementation process was found to be gener-
ally effective. The factors that influenced the effectiveness will be
discussed in the poster.
Conclusion There were a number of trends when we looked at
the overall results which included aspects of the guidelines that
were done well and aspects that needed improvement which will
be further discussed in the poster.
Disclosure of interest The author has not supplied his/her decla-
ration of competing interest.
e-Poster viewing: Rehabilitation and
psycho-education
EV1170
Development of an interview schedule
for assessing factors influencing
educational outcome in students with
schizophrenia
A. Chattopadhyay ∗, C.N. Kumar , J. Thirthalli , U. Mehta ,
S. Thanapal
1 KB Bhabha Hospital, Psychiatry, Mumbai, India
2 Nimhans, Psychiatry, Bengaluru, India
∗ Corresponding author.
Introduction Schizophrenia is a severe mental disorder with a
relatively high toll on the quality of life of the patient and care-
giver. It has a high financial, emotional and psychosocial burden.
Surprisingly, optimumacademic and educational outcomes in indi-
viduals with schizophrenia have been a neglected area of research
and service provision.
Objectives Development of an interview schedule assessing the
helpful and hindering factors affecting the educational attainment
in persons with schizophrenia.
Methods Twenty-one participant were recruited (11 patients
and 10 caregivers) from August 2014 to 2015 using purposive
sampling and interviewed in a semi-structured qualitative fash-
ion. Patients were between 16–25 years of age. Data collection
and interpretation continued iteratively till saturation of fac-
tors was achieved. The list of factors (hindering/helping) was
compiled and sent to a panel of 14 experts. They rated the
schedule and the individual factors on a Likert scale. Reliability
and validity parameters were tested and the final schedule was
formulated.
Results The final schedule contained 17 hindering and 18 helping
factors. Detailed instructions to the interviewer for administration
of the schedule are included. The factors have been further subdi-
vided into illness related and illness unrelated. Some of the major
hindering factorswere symptoms of illness, medication side effects,
delay in treatment initiation, perceived conflict in parents, lack
of motivation. The major helpful factors were adequate symptom
control, withholding inpatient care, spirituality, and peer group
acceptance.