Overcoming challenges in delivering integrated motivational interviewing and cognitive behavioural therapy for bipolar disorder with co-morbid alcohol use:Therapist perspectives

Background: Alcohol misuse is common in bipolar disorder and is associated with worse outcomes. A recent study evaluated integrated motivational interviewing and cognitive behavioural therapy for bipolar disorder and alcohol misuse with promising results in terms of the feasibility of delivering the therapy and the acceptability to participants. Aims: Here we present the experiences of the therapists and supervisors from the trial to identify the key challenges in working with this client group and how these might be overcome. Method: Four therapists and two supervisors participated in a focus group. Topic guides for the group were informed by a summary of challenges and obstacles that each therapist had completed at the end of therapy for each individual client. The audio recording of the focus group was transcribed and data were analysed using thematic analysis.Results:We identified five themes: addressing alcohol use versus other problems; impact of bipolar disorder on therapy; importance of avoidance and overcoming it; fine balance in relation to shame and normalising use; and 'talking the talk' versus 'walking the walk'. Conclusions: Findings suggest that clients may be willing to explore motivations for using alcohol even if they are not ready to change their drinking, and they may want help with a range of mental health problems. Emotional and behavioural avoidance may be a key factor in maintaining alcohol use in this client group and therapists should be aware of a possible discrepancy between clients' intentions to reduce misuse and their actual behaviour

Integrated motivational interviewing and cognitive behavioural therapy for people with psychosis and comorbid substance misuse: randomised controlled trial

Objectives To evaluate the effectiveness of integrated motivational interviewing and cognitive behaviour therapy in addition to standard care for patients with psychosis and a co-morbid substance use problem. Design Two-centre, open, rater-blind randomised controlled trial Setting UK Secondary Care Participants 327 patients with clinical diagnoses of schizophrenia, schizophreniform or schizoaffective disorder and DSM-IV diagnoses of drug and/or alcohol dependence or abuse Interventions Participants were randomly allocated to integrated motivational interviewing and cognitive behaviour therapy or standard care. Therapy has two phases. Phase one – “motivation building” – concerns engaging the patient, then exploring and resolving ambivalence for change in substance use. Phase two –“Action” – supports and facilitates change using cognitive behavioural approaches. Up to 26 therapy sessions were delivered over one year. Main outcomes The primary outcome was death from any cause or admission to hospital in the 12 months after therapy. Secondary outcomes were frequency and amount of substance use (Timeline Followback), readiness to change, perceived negative consequences of use, psychotic symptom ratings, number and duration of relapses, global assessment of functioning and deliberate self harm, at 12 and 24 months, with additional Timeline Followback assessments at 6 and 18 months. Analysis was by intention-to-treat with robust treatment effect estimates. Results 327 participants were randomised. 326 (99.7%) were assessed on the primary outcome, 246 (75.2%) on main secondary outcomes at 24 months. Regarding the primary outcome, there was no beneficial treatment effect on hospital admissions/ death during follow-up, with 20.2% (33/163) of controls and 23.3% (38/163) of the therapy group deceased or admitted (adjusted odds-ratio 1.16; P= 0.579; 95% confidence interval 0.68 to 1.99). For secondary outcomes there was no treatment effect on frequency of substance use or perceived negative consequences, but a statistically significant effect of therapy on amount used per substance-using day (adjusted odds-ratios: (a) for main substance 1.50; P=0.016; 1.08 to 2.09, (b) all substances 1.48; P=0.017; 1.07 to 2.05). There was a statistically significant treatment effect on readiness to change use at 12 months (adjusted odds-ratio 2.05; P=0.004; 1.26 to 3.31), not maintained at 24 months. There were no treatment effects on assessed clinical outcomes. Conclusions Integrated motivational interviewing and cognitive behaviour therapy for people with psychosis and substance misuse does not improve outcome in terms of hospitalisation, symptom outcomes or functioning. It does result in a reduction in amount of substance use which is maintained over the year’s follow up. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials: ISRCTN1440448

Understanding Outcomes in a Randomized Controlled Trial of a Ward-based Intervention on Psychiatric Inpatient Wards: A Qualitative Analysis of Staff and Patient Experiences.

OBJECTIVE: Team formulation is advocated to improve quality of care in mental health care and evidence from a recent U.K.-based trial supports its use in inpatient settings. This study aimed to identify the effects of formulation on practice from the perspectives of staff and patient participating in the trial, including barriers and enhancers to implementing the intervention. METHOD: We carried out semistructured interviews with 57 staff and 20 patients. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Main outcomes were: improved staff understanding of patients, better team collaboration and increased staff awareness of their own feelings. Key contextual factors were as follows: overcoming both staff and patient anxiety, unwelcome expert versus collaborative stance, competing demands, and management support. CONCLUSION: Team formulation should be implemented to improve quality of care in inpatient settings and larger definitive trials should be carried out to assess the effect of this intervention on patient outcomes

Cognitive behaviour therapy versus counselling intervention for anxiety in young people with high-functioning autism spectrum disorders: a pilot randomised controlled trial

The use of cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) as a treatment for children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) has been explored in a number of trials. Whilst CBT appears superior to no treatment or treatment as usual, few studies have assessed CBT against a control group receiving an alternative therapy. Our randomised controlled trial compared use of CBT against person-centred counselling for anxiety in 36 young people with ASD, ages 12–18. Outcome measures included parent- teacher- and self-reports of anxiety and social disability. Whilst each therapy produced improvements inparticipants, neither therapy was superior to the other to a significant degree on any measure. This is consistent with findings for adults

Demographic predictors of wellbeing in Carers of people with psychosis: secondary analysis of trial data

Background: Carers of people with psychosis are at a greater risk of physical and mental health problems compared to the general population. Yet, not all carers will experience a decline in health. This predicament has provided the rationale for research studies exploring what factors predict poor wellbeing in carers of people with psychosis. Our study builds on previous research by testing the predictive value of demographic variables on carer wellbeing within a single regression model. Methods: To achieve this aim, we conducted secondary analysis on two trial data sets that were merged and recoded for the purposes of this study. Results: Contrary to our hypotheses, only carer gender and age predicted carer wellbeing; with lower levels of carer wellbeing being associated with being female or younger (aged under 50). However, the final regression model explained only 11% of the total variance. Conclusions: Suggestions for future research are discussed in light of the limitations inherent in secondary analysis studies. Further research is needed where sample sizes are sufficient to explore the interactive and additive impact of other predictor variables

Implementation of a Family Intervention for Individuals with Schizophrenia

Families are rarely included in clinical care despite research showing that family involvement has a positive effect on individuals with schizophrenia by reducing relapse, improving work functioning, and social adjustment. The VA QUERI study, EQUIP (Enhancing QUality of care In Psychosis), implemented family services for this population. At two VA medical centers, veterans with schizophrenia and their clinicians were interviewed separately at baseline and 15 months. A family intervention was implemented, and a process evaluation of the implementation was conducted. Veterans with schizophrenia (n = 173) and their clinicians (n = 29). Consent to contact family was obtained, mailers to engage families were sent, families were prioritized as high need for family services, and staff volunteers were trained in a brief three-session family intervention. Of those enrolled, 100 provided consent for family involvement. Seventy-three of the 100 were sent a mailer to engage them in care; none became involved. Clinicians were provided assessment data on their patients and notified of 50 patients needing family services. Of those 50, 6 families were already involved, 34 were never contacted, and 10 were contacted; 7 new families became involved in care. No families were referred to the family psychoeducational program. Uptake of the family intervention failed due to barriers from all stakeholders. Families did not respond to the mailer, patients were concerned about privacy and burdening family, clinicians had misperceptions of family-patient contact, and organizations did not free up time or offer incentives to provide the service. If a full partnership with patients and families is to be achieved, these barriers will need to be addressed, and a family-friendly environment will need to be supported by clinicians and their organizations. Applicability to family involvement in other disorders is discussed

Randomised control trial of the effectiveness of an integrated psychosocial health promotion intervention aimed at improving health and reducing substance use in established psychosis (IMPaCT)

© 2017 The Author(s). Background: People with psychosis have a reduced life expectancy of 10-20years, largely due to cardiovascular disease. This trial aimed to determine the effectiveness of a modular health promotion intervention (IMPaCT Therapy) in improving health and reducing cardiovascular risk in psychosis. Methods: A multicentre, two arm, parallel cluster RCT was conducted across five UK mental health NHS trusts. Community care coordinators (CC) were randomly assigned to training and supervision in delivering IMPaCT Therapy or treatment as usual (TAU) to current patients with psychosis (cluster). The primary outcome was the physical and mental health subscales of the Short form-36 (SF-36) questionnaire. Results: Of 104 care coordinators recruited, 52 (with 213 patients) were randomised to deliver IMPaCT therapy and 52 (with 193 patients) randomised to TAU. Of 406 patients, 318 (78%) and 301 (74%) attended 12- and 15-month follow-up respectively. IMPaCT therapy showed no significant effect on the physical or mental health component SF-36 scores versus TAU at 12 or 15months. No effect was observed for cardiovascular risk indicators, except for HDL cholesterol, which improved more with IMPACT therapy than TAU (Treatment effect (95% CI); 0.085 (0.007 to 0.16); p= 0.034). The 22% of patients who received > 180min of IMPACT Therapy in addition to usual care achieved a greater reduction in waist circumference than did controls, which was clinically significant. Conclusion: Training and supervising community care coordinators to use IMPaCT therapy in patients with psychosis is insufficient to significantly improve physical or mental health quality of life. The search for effective, pragmatic interventions deliverable in health care services continues. Trial registration: The trial was retrospectively registered with ISRCTN registry on 23/4/2010 at ISRCTN58667926 ; recruitment started on 01/03/2010 with first randomization on 09.08.2010 ISRCTN58667926

Collaborative community based care for people and their families living with schizophrenia in India: protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: There is a large treatment gap with few community services for people with schizophrenia in low income countries largely due to the shortage of specialist mental healthcare human resources. Community based rehabilitation (CBR), involving lay health workers, has been shown to be feasible, acceptable and more effective than routine care for people with schizophrenia in observational studies. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether a lay health worker led, Collaborative Community Based Care (CCBC) intervention, combined with usual Facility Based Care (FBC), is superior to FBC alone in improving outcomes for people with schizophrenia and their caregivers in India. METHODS/DESIGN: This trial is a multi-site, parallel group randomised controlled trial design in India.The trial will be conducted concurrently at three sites in India where persons with schizophrenia will be screened for eligibility and recruited after providing informed consent. Trial participants will be randomly allocated in a 2:1 ratio to the CCBC+FBC and FBC arms respectively using an allocation sequence pre-prepared through the use of permuted blocks, stratified within site. The structured CCBC intervention will be delivered by trained lay community health workers (CHWs) working together with the treating Psychiatrist. We aim to recruit 282 persons with schizophrenia. The primary outcomes are reduction in severity of symptoms of schizophrenia and disability at 12 months. The study will be conducted according to good ethical practice, data analysis and reporting guidelines. DISCUSSION: If the additional CCBC intervention delivered by front line CHWs is demonstrated to be effective and cost-effective in comparison to usually available care, this intervention can be scaled up to expand coverage and improve outcomes for persons with schizophrenia and their caregivers in low income countries. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered with the International Society for the Registration of Clinical Trials and the allocated unique ID number is ISRCTN 56877013