Clinical effectiveness of the psychological therapy Mental Health Intervention for Children with Epilepsy in addition to usual care compared with assessment-enhanced usual care alone: a multicentre, randomised controlled clinical trial in the UK

Background Mental health difficulties are common in children and young people with chronic health conditions, but many of those in need do not access evidence-based psychological treatments. The study aim was to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of integrated mental health treatment for children and young people with epilepsy, a common chronic health condition known to be associated with a particularly high rate of co-occurring mental health difficulties. Methods We conducted a parallel group, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial of participants aged 3–18 years, attending epilepsy clinics across England and Northern Ireland who met diagnostic criteria for a common mental health disorder. Participants were randomised (1:1; using an independent web-based system) to receive the Mental Health Intervention for Children with Epilepsy (MICE) in addition to usual care, or assessment-enhanced usual care alone (control). Children and young people in both groups received a full diagnostic mental health assessment. MICE was a modular psychological intervention designed to treat common mental health conditions in children and young people using evidence-based approaches such as cognitive behaviour therapy and behavioural parenting strategies. Usual care for mental health disorders varied by site but typically included referral to appropriate services. Participants, along with their caregivers, and clinicians were not masked to treatment allocation but statisticians were masked until the point of analysis. The primary outcome, analysed by modified intention-to-treat, was the parent-report Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) at 6 months post-randomisation. The study is complete and registered with ISRCTN (57823197). Findings 1401 young people were potentially deemed eligible for study inclusion. Following the exclusion of 531 young people, 870 participants were assessed for eligibility and completed the SDQ, and 480 caregivers provided consent for study inclusion between May 20, 2019, and Jan 31, 2022. Between Aug 28, 2019, and Feb 21, 2022, 334 participants (mean ages 10·5 years [SD 3·6] in the MICE group vs 10·3 [4·0] in control group at baseline) were randomly assigned to an intervention using minimisation balanced by age, primary mental health disorder, diagnosis of intellectual disability, and autistic spectrum disorder at baseline. 168 (50%) of the participants were female and 166 (50%) were male. 166 participants were randomly assigned to the MICE group and 168 were randomly assigned to the control group. At 6 months, the mean SDQ difficulties for the 148 participants in the MICE group was 17·6 (SD 6·3) and 19·6 (6·1) for the 148 participants in the control group. The adjusted effect of MICE was –1·7 (95% CI –2·8 to –0·5; p=0·0040; Cohen's d, 0·3). 14 (8%) patients in the MICE group experienced at least one serious adverse event compared with 24 (14%) in the control group. 68% percent of serious adverse events (50 events) were admission due to seizures. Interpretation MICE was superior to assessment-enhanced usual care in improving symptoms of emotional and behavioural difficulties in young people with epilepsy and common mental health disorders. The trial therefore shows that mental health comorbidities can be effectively and safely treated by a variety of clinicians, utilising an integrated intervention across ages and in the context of intellectual disability and autism. The evidence from this trial suggests that such a model should be fully embedded in epilepsy services and serves as a model for other chronic health conditions in young people

Examining change in the mental health of young people with epilepsy following a successful psychological intervention

Objective: Evaluate the cognitive, behavioural and affective processes involved in therapeutic change for young people with epilepsy and mental health difficulties receiving an integrated mental health intervention. Methods: As part of a mixed methods convergent design, qualitative data were gathered in parallel to quantitative data at two timepoints in a randomised controlled trial testing the Mental Health Intervention for Children with Epilepsy in addition to usual care. Twenty-five young people and/or their families were interviewed before and after the intervention about the young person’s mental and physical health, and their experience of therapy. Interview data were analysed inductively, idiographically and longitudinally using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis combined with Framework Analysis. Results: The young people’s emotional and behaviour problems improved, mirroring the trial’s quantitative outcomes. Their anxiety decreased and behaviour improved as they acquired tools and understanding through therapy. Problems, like aggressive behaviours and emotional outbursts, were also reduced, with young people gaining increased awareness and ability to self-regulate and parents learning to contain their child’s impulsive behaviours. Conclusions: The qualitative findings complement the MICE trial’s significant positive quantitative results by providing insight and context to the therapeutic change, providing vivid insight into the mechanisms of therapy for individual families

"People don't have the answers": A qualitative exploration of the experiences of young people with Long COVID.

Peer reviewed: TrueYoung people living with Long COVID are learning to navigate life with a constellation of poorly understood symptoms. Most qualitative studies on experiences living with Long COVID focus on adult populations. This study aimed to understand the experiences of young people living with Long COVID. Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted (n = 16); 11 young people (aged 13-19) and five parents were recruited from the Children and Young People with Long COVID (CLoCk) study (n = 11) or its patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) group (n = 5). Thematic analysis generated four themes: (i) Unravelling Long COVID: Exploring Symptom Journeys and Diagnostic Dilemmas; (ii) Identity Disruption and Adjustment; (iii) Long COVID's Ripple Effect: the impact on Mental Health, Connections, and Education; and (iv) Navigating Long COVID: barriers to support and accessing services. Treatment options were perceived as not widely available or ineffective, emphasising the need for viable and accessible interventions for young people living with Long COVID