Measuring adherence in social recovery therapy with people with first episode psychosis

Background:The SUPEREDEN3 study, a phase II randomized controlled trial, suggests that social recovery therapy (SRT) is useful in improving functional outcomes in people with first episode psychosis. SRT incorporates cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) techniques with case management and employment support, and therefore has a different emphasis to traditional CBT for psychosis, requiring a new adherence tool.Aims:This paper describes the SRT adherence checklist and content of the therapy delivered in the SUPEREDEN3 trial, outlining the frequency of SRT techniques and proportion of participants who received a full therapy dose. It was hypothesized that behavioural techniques would be used frequently, consistent with the behavioural emphasis of SRT.Method:Research therapists completed an adherence checklist after each therapy session, endorsing elements of SRT present. Data from 1236 therapy sessions were reviewed to determine whether participants received full, partial or no therapy dose.Results:Of the 75 participants randomized to receive SRT, 57.3% received a full dose, 24% a partial dose, and 18.7% received no dose. Behavioural techniques were endorsed in 50.5% of sessions, with cognitive techniques endorsed in 34.9% of sessions.Conclusions:This report describes an adherence checklist which should be used when delivering SRT in both research and clinical practice. As hypothesized, behavioural techniques were a prominent feature of the SRT delivered in SUPEREDEN3, consistent with the behavioural emphasis of the approach. The use of this adherence tool would be considered essential for anyone delivering SRT looking to ensure adherence to the model

A systematic review and lived-experience panel analysis of hopefulness in youth depression treatment

Hopefulness is arguably of central importance to the recovery of youth with major or complex youth depression, yet it is unclear how hopefulness can best be enhanced in treatment. A narrative synthesis of published and grey literature was combined with new insights from a youth lived-experience panel (N = 15), focusing on to what extent and how specific psychological therapies and standard mental health care scaffold hopefulness as applied to depression among 14–25-year-olds. Thirty-one studies of variable quality were included in this review; thirteen were qualitative, thirteen quantitative, and five used mixed methods. Hopefulness is an important active ingredient of psychotherapies and standard mental health care in youth depression. Evidence suggests talking and activity therapies have moderate to large effects on hopefulness and that hopefulness can be enhanced in standard mental health care. However, varying intervention effects suggest a marked degree of uncertainty. Hopefulness is best scaffolded by a positive relational environment in which there is support for identifying and pursuing personally valued goals and engaging in meaningful activity

Social recovery therapy: a treatment manual

Social Recovery Therapy is an individual psychosocial therapy developed for people with psychosis. The therapy aims to improve social recovery through increasing the amount of time individuals spend in meaningful structured activity. Social Recovery Therapy draws on our model of social disability arising as functional patterns of withdrawal in response to early socio-emotional difficulties and compounded by low hopefulness, self-agency and motivation. The core components of Social Recovery Therapy include using an assertive outreach approach to promote a positive therapeutic relationship, with the focus of the intervention on using active behavioural work conducted outside the clinical room and promoting hope, values, meaning, and positive schema. The therapy draws on traditional Cognitive Behavioural Therapy techniques but differs with respect to the increased use of behavioural and multi-systemic work, the focus on the development of hopefulness and positive self, and the inclusion of elements of case management and supported employment. Our treatment trials provide evidence for the therapy leading to clinically meaningful increases in structured activity for individuals experiencing first episode and longer-term psychosis. In this paper, we present the core intervention components with examples in order to facilitate evaluation and implementation of the approach

Effects of SlowMo, a blended digital therapy targeting reasoning, on paranoia among people with psychosis: a randomized clinical trial

Importance Persistent paranoia is common among patients with psychosis. Cognitive-behavioral therapy for psychosis can be effective. However, challenges in engagement and effectiveness remain. Objective To investigate the effects on paranoia and mechanisms of action of SlowMo, a digitally supported reasoning intervention, plus usual care compared with usual care only. Design, Setting, and Participants This parallel-arm, assessor-blinded, randomized clinical trial recruited participants at UK community health services from May 1, 2017, to May 14, 2019. Eligible participants consisted of a referral sample with schizophrenia-spectrum psychosis and distressing, persistent (≥3 months) paranoia. Interventions Individuals were randomized 1:1 to SlowMo, consisting of 8 digitally supported face-to-face sessions and a mobile app, plus usual care (n = 181) and usual care only (n = 181). Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was paranoia, measured by the Green et al Paranoid Thoughts Scale (GPTS) total score at 24 weeks. Secondary outcomes included GPTS total score at 12 weeks and GPTS Part A (reference) and Part B (persecutory) scores, the Psychotic Symptom Rating Scales (PSYRATS Delusion subscale), reasoning (belief flexibility, possibility of being mistaken [Maudsley Assessment of Delusions, rated 0%-100%]), and jumping to conclusions (Beads Task). Results A total of 361 participants were included in intention-to-treat analysis, of whom 252 (69.8%) were male and 249 (69.0%) were White; the mean (SD) age was 42.6 (11.6) years. At 24 weeks, 332 participants (92.0%) provided primary outcome data. Of 181 participants in the SlowMo group, 145 (80.1%) completed therapy. SlowMo plus usual care was not associated with greater reductions than usual care in GPTS total score at 24 weeks (Cohen d, 0.20; 95% CI, −0.02 to 0.40; P = .06). There were significant effects on secondary paranoia outcomes at 12 weeks, including GPTS total score (Cohen d, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.09-0.51; P = .005), Part A score (Cohen d, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.06-0.39; P = .009), and Part B score (Cohen d, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.08-0.56; P = .009), and at 24 weeks, including Part B score (Cohen d, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.01-0.49; P = .04) but not Part A score (Cohen d, 0.12; 95% CI, −0.05 to 0.28; P = .18). Improvements were observed in an observer-rated measure of persecutory delusions (PSYRATS delusion) at 12 weeks (Cohen d, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.17-0.78; P = .002) and 24 weeks (Cohen d, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.20-0.80; P = .001) and belief flexibility at 12 weeks (Cohen d, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.09-0.49; P = .004) and 24 weeks (Cohen d, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.08-0.49; P = .005). There were no significant effects on jumping to conclusions. Improved belief flexibility and worry mediated paranoia change (range mediated, 36%-56%). Conclusions and Relevance SlowMo did not demonstrate significant improvements in the primary measure of paranoia at 24 weeks; however, a beneficial effect of SlowMo on paranoia was indicated by the results on the primary measure at an earlier point and on observer-rated paranoia and self-reported persecution at 12 and 24 weeks. Further work to optimize SlowMo’s effects is warranted

Antipsychotic medication versus psychological intervention versus a combination of both in adolescents with first-episode psychosis (MAPS): a multicentre, three-arm, randomised controlled pilot and feasibility study

Background Evidence for the effectiveness of treatments in early-onset psychosis is sparse. Current guidance for the treatment of early-onset psychosis is mostly extrapolated from trials in adult populations. The UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has recommended evaluation of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of antipsychotic drugs versus psychological intervention (cognitive behavioural therapy [CBT] and family intervention) versus the combination of these treatments for early-onset psychosis. The aim of this study was to establish the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial of antipsychotic monotherapy, psychological intervention monotherapy, and antipsychotics plus psychological intervention in adolescents with first-episode psychosis. Methods We did a multicentre pilot and feasibility trial according to a randomised, single-blind, three-arm, controlled design. We recruited participants from seven UK National Health Service Trust sites. Participants were aged 14–18 years; help-seeking; had presented with first-episode psychosis in the past year; were under the care of a psychiatrist; were showing current psychotic symptoms; and met ICD-10 criteria for schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or delusional disorder, or met the entry criteria for an early intervention for psychosis service. Participants were assigned (1:1:1) to antipsychotics, psychological intervention (CBT with optional family intervention), or antipsychotics plus psychological intervention. Randomisation was via a web-based randomisation system, with permuted blocks of random size, stratified by centre and family contact. CBT incorporated up to 26 sessions over 6 months plus up to four booster sessions, and family intervention incorporated up to six sessions over 6 months. Choice and dose of antipsychotic were at the discretion of the treating consultant psychiatrist. Participants were followed up for a maximum of 12 months. The primary outcome was feasibility (ie, data on trial referral and recruitment, session attendance or medication adherence, retention, and treatment acceptability) and the proposed primary efficacy outcome was total score on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) at 6 months. Primary outcomes were analysed by intention to treat. Safety outcomes were reported according to as-treated status, for all patients who had received at least one session of CBT or family intervention, or at least one dose of antipsychotics. The study was prospectively registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN80567433. Findings Of 101 patients referred to the study, 61 patients (mean age 16·3 years [SD 1·3]) were recruited from April 10, 2017, to Oct 31, 2018, 18 of whom were randomly assigned to psychological intervention, 22 to antipsychotics, and 21 to antipsychotics plus psychological intervention. The trial recruitment rate was 68% of our target sample size of 90 participants. The study had a low referral to recruitment ratio (around 2:1), a high rate of retention (51 [84%] participants retained at the 6-month primary endpoint), a high rate of adherence to psychological intervention (defined as six or more sessions of CBT; in 32 [82%] of 39 participants in the monotherapy and combined groups), and a moderate rate of adherence to antipsychotic medication (defined as at least 6 consecutive weeks of exposure to antipsychotics; in 28 [65%] of 43 participants in the monotherapy and combined groups). Mean scores for PANSS total at the 6-month primary endpoint were 68·6 (SD 17·3) for antipsychotic monotherapy (6·2 points lower than at randomisation), 59·8 (13·7) for psychological intervention (13·1 points lower than at randomisation), and 62·0 (15·9) for antipsychotics plus psychological intervention (13·9 points lower than at randomisation). A good clinical response at 6 months (defined as ≥50% improvement in PANSS total score) was achieved in four (22%) of 18 patients receiving antipsychotic monotherapy, five (31%) of 16 receiving psychological intervention, and five (29%) of 17 receiving antipsychotics plus psychological intervention. In as-treated groups, serious adverse events occurred in eight [35%] of 23 patients in the combined group, two [13%] of 15 in the antipsychotics group, four [24%] of 17 in the psychological intervention group, and four [80%] of five who did not receive any treatment. No serious adverse events were considered to be related to participation in the trial. Interpretation This trial is the first to show that a head-to-head clinical trial comparing psychological intervention, antipsychotics, and their combination is safe in young people with first-episode psychosis. However, the feasibility of a larger trial is unclear because of site-specific recruitment challenges, and amendments to trial design would be needed for an adequately powered clinical and cost-effectiveness trial that provides robust evidence

A three-arm feasibility randomised controlled trial comparing antipsychotic medication to psychological intervention to a combined treatment in adolescents with first episode psychosis: The Managing Adolescent first episode Psychosis Study (MAPS)

Background: The evidence base for treatments for early-onset psychosis (EOP) is limited and of low quality. Current guidance for the treatment of EOP is mostly extrapolated from trials in adult populations. NICE, in the United Kingdom (UK), make a specific research recommendation for the evaluation of clinical and cost-effectiveness of antipsychotics (AP), versus psychological intervention (cognitive behaviour therapy [CBT] and family intervention), versus combination treatment for EOP. The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) in the UK commissioned this research to establish feasibility and acceptability of a definitive trial examining these three treatment options. Methods: We conducted a multi-site, Prospective Randomised Open Blinded Evaluation (PROBE) design, feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing AP monotherapy with psychological intervention monotherapy (PI) plus a combination of these treatments in 14-18-year olds with a first episode of psychosis. We recruited participants from seven United Kingdom sites. Participants were followed-up at six and 12 months. Cognitive behavioural therapy incorporated up to 26 sessions over 6 months plus up to four booster sessions. Family intervention included up to six sessions over 6 months. Choice and dose of antipsychotic were at the discretion of the treating consultant psychiatrist. The primary outcome was feasibility data (recruitment, retention, acceptability) and the main effectiveness outcome was the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score at 6 months. We conducted a repeated-measures analysis of the proposed primary outcome (PANSS) and the secondary outcome, the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR) using a mixed effects model to account for the discrete timing of the follow-up assessments and adjusted for site. Safety outcomes were reported on the basis of as treated status defined as any one session of CBT or any one dose of APs; descriptive statistics are reported for safety outcomes. The study was prospectively registered on 27th February 2017, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN80567433. Findings: 61 patients (aged 14-18 years; mean 16.3, SD 1.3) were recruited from 1st April 2017 to 31st October 2018, 18 were assigned to psychological intervention, 22 to antipsychotics and 21 to the combination. The feasibility of recruitment was unclear, since the trial only recruited 61 of a target of 90 participants. The study had a low referral: randomisation ratio (101:61), high rates of retention (>80%), high rates of adherence for psychological intervention (82.1%) defined as 6 or more sessions of CBT, and moderate rates of adherence for antipsychotic medication (65.1%), defined as 6 or more consecutive weeks of APs. The median number of sessions for CBT for those in the PI arm was 14 (IQR 9, 23) and 15 in the combined arm (IQR 9, 17). Of those in receipt of APs the mean duration that the participant remained on the medication was 31.5 weeks (SD 14.6, minimum 8.7 and maximum 52). There were no serious adverse events considered to be related to the trial. Interpretation: This is the first trial to show that it is safe to conduct a head-to-head clinical trial comparing psychological intervention with antipsychotics and the combination in people in young people with a first-episode psychosis. However, feasibility is unclear due to not meeting the recruitment progression criteria, so amendments to trial design are required in order to conduct an adequately powered clinical and cost effectiveness trial to provide robust evidence

Social recovery therapy: therapists’ experience of hope working with complex clients

Section 1 Systematic Review: The subject of therapist’s emotions in the context of delivering CBT has the potential of providing insights into therapy delivery intricacies and therapist wellbeing. However, it is currently still in its infancy and has mostly been theoretical. The aim of the present systematic review is to explore the findings of empirical research carried out thus far, in terms of the emotional impact of delivering CBT on the therapist. From the 2318 papers initially identified through various database searches (PsychINFO, Medline, Web of Science and Scopus) eight were included in the analysis, using PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews. This study uses Thematic Analysis to explore the main themes (emotional impact on the therapist, training and supervision factors, therapist factors, organizational factors) and associated sub-themes identified from the data. Section 2 Research Report: There is currently scarce research literature looking at cognitive behavioural therapists’ experiences of delivering therapy. Hope is particularly relevant in the context of working with young people at risk of developing long-term disability. A qualitative study was carried out to gain an understanding of therapists’ experiences of hope in the context of delivering Social Recovery Therapy (SRT) to this population. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with ten therapists and data was analysed using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. Five main themes and two contextual themes emerged from the narratives, painting a picture of the therapists’ journey. For each main theme, associated sub-themes were identified and discussed. This study explores the richness of therapists’ emotions via their journey of delivering SRT to young people with social disability and emerging mental health problems. It highlights therapists’ challenges and strategies in the maintenance of hope through this process. Section 3 Critical Appraisal: A critical exploration of the personal and professional reflections on the research process, based on a research journal compiled throughout the process

Violência sobre Crianças

Trata-se de um estudo de revisão sobre a violência exercida sobre crianças, os agentes da violência, os sujeitos da violência, os factores de risco, as consequências na idade adulta e a recidividade de violência sexual