Risk of criminal victimisation in outpatients with common mental health disorders

Crime victimisation is a serious problem in psychiatric patients. However, research has focused on patients with severe mental illness and few studies exist that address victimisation in other outpatient groups, such as patients with depression. Due to large differences in methodology of the studies that address crime victimisation, a comparison of prevalence between psychiatric diagnostic groups is hard to make. Objectives of this study were to determine and compare one-year prevalence of violent and non-violent criminal victimisation among outpatients from different diagnostic psychiatric groups and to examine prevalence differences with the general population.Criminal victimisation prevalence was measured in 300 outpatients living in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with outpatients with depressive disorder (n = 102), substance use disorder (SUD, n = 106) and severe mental illness (SMI, n = 92) using a National Crime Victimisation Survey, and compared with a matched general population sample (n = 10865).Of all outpatients, 61% reported experiencing some kind of victimisation over the past year; 33% reported violent victimisation (3.5 times more than the general population) and 36% reported property crimes (1.2 times more than the general population). Outpatients with depression (67%) and SUD (76%) were victimised more often than SMI outpatients (39%). Younger age and hostile behaviour were associated with violent victimisation, while being male and living alone were associated with non-violent victimisation. Moreover, SUD was associated with both violent and non-violent victimisation.Outpatients with depression, SUD, and SMI are at increased risk of victimisation compared to the general population. Furthermore, our results indicate that victimisation of violent and non-violent crimes is more common in outpatients with depression and SUD than in outpatients with SMI living independently in the community

Digital Interventions for People With Co-Occurring Depression and Problematic Alcohol Use: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Aims: This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the effectiveness of digital interventions addressing depressive symptoms and alcohol use simultaneously among people with co-occurring depression and problematic alcohol use.Methods: Seven databases were searched for trials evaluating digital interventions aimed at depression and alcohol use. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted to pool effects on depressive symptoms and alcohol use up to 3-month and 6-month follow-up. Overall quality for every outcome was assessed with GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation).Results: The pooled effect of digital interventions compared to their comparators was in favour of digital interventions. Small but significant effects on depressive symptoms at 3-month follow-up were found (g = 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.06-0.62, P = 0.02, k = 6) and non-significant effects at 6-month follow-up (g = 0.29, 95% CI: -0.16 to 0.73, P = 0.15, k = 5). For alcohol use, the pooled effect of digital interventions was small and non-significant at 3-month follow-up (g = 0.14, 95% CI: -0.02 to 0.30, P = 0.07, k = 6) and significant at 6-month follow-up (g = 0.14, 95% CI: 0.07-0.20, P = 0.005, k = 5). Sensitivity analysis indicated the latter finding to be sensitive to statistical estimator choice. Quality of evidence was moderate, except for depressive symptoms at 6-month follow-up for which it was low.Conclusion: Based on the literature, digital interventions are effective in reducing depressive symptoms at 3-month follow-up and alcohol use at 6-month follow-up among people with comorbid depression and problematic alcohol use. More high-quality trials are needed to confirm the current findings.</p

Формування світогляду О. Кониського

Crime victimisation is a serious problem in psychiatric patients. However, research has focused on patients with severe mental illness and few studies exist that address victimisation in other outpatient groups, such as patients with depression. Due to large differences in methodology of the studies that address crime victimisation, a comparison of prevalence between psychiatric diagnostic groups is hard to make. Objectives of this study were to determine and compare one-year prevalence of violent and non-violent criminal victimisation among outpatients from different diagnostic psychiatric groups and to examine prevalence differences with the general population.Criminal victimisation prevalence was measured in 300 outpatients living in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with outpatients with depressive disorder (n = 102), substance use disorder (SUD, n = 106) and severe mental illness (SMI, n = 92) using a National Crime Victimisation Survey, and compared with a matched general population sample (n = 10865).Of all outpatients, 61% reported experiencing some kind of victimisation over the past year; 33% reported violent victimisation (3.5 times more than the general population) and 36% reported property crimes (1.2 times more than the general population). Outpatients with depression (67%) and SUD (76%) were victimised more often than SMI outpatients (39%). Younger age and hostile behaviour were associated with violent victimisation, while being male and living alone were associated with non-violent victimisation. Moreover, SUD was associated with both violent and non-violent victimisation.Outpatients with depression, SUD, and SMI are at increased risk of victimisation compared to the general population. Furthermore, our results indicate that victimisation of violent and non-violent crimes is more common in outpatients with depression and SUD than in outpatients with SMI living independently in the community

Economic evaluation of day hospital versus intensive outpatient mentalization-based treatment alongside a randomized controlled trial with 36-month follow-up

Mentalization-based treatment (MBT) has demonstrated robust effectiveness in the treatment of borderline personality disorder (BPD) in both day hospital (MBT-DH) and intensive outpatient MBT (MBT-IOP) programs. Given the large differences in intensity and associated treatment costs, there is a need for studies comparing their cost-effectiveness. A health economic evaluation of MBT-DH versus MBT-IOP was performed alongside a multicenter randomized controlled trial with a 36-month follow-up. In three mental health-care institutions in the Netherlands, 114 patients were randomly allocated to MBT-DH (n = 70) or MBT-IOP (n = 44) and assessed every 6 months. Societal costs were compared with quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained and the number of months in remission over 36 months. The QALY gains over 36 months were 1.96 (SD = 0.58) for MBT-DH and 1.83 (SD = 0.56) for MBT-IOP; the respective number of months in remission were 16.0 (SD = 11.5) and 11.1 (SD = 10.7). Societal costs were €106,038 for MBT-DH and €91,368 for MBT-IOP. The incremental cost for one additional QALY with MBT-DH compared with MBT-IOP was €107,000. The incremental cost for 1 month in remission was almost €3000. Assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of €50,000 for a QALY, there was a 33% likelihood that MBT-DH is more cost-effective than MBT-IOP in terms of costs per QALY. Although MBT-DH leads to slightly more QALYs and remission months, it is probably not cost-effective when compared with MBT-IOP for BPD patients, as the small additional health benefits in MBT-DH did not outweigh the substantially higher societal costs

Effectiveness of an add-on guided internet-based emotion regulation training (E-TRAIN) in adolescents with depressive and/or anxiety disorders: study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial

During adolescence, depressive and anxiety disorders are among the most common mental health disorders. Both disorders tend to persist, are predictive for other mental disorders, and are associated with severe impairment in diverse areas. Although Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) has proven to be an effective treatment, a considerable number of adolescents do not respond to CBT and residual symptoms often remain. Therefore, it is of great importance to improve treatment outcomes for depressed and/or anxious adolescents. Dysfunctional emotion regulation appears to be a transdiagnostic factor in the development and maintenance of aforementioned disorders. Enhancing emotion regulation skills may therefore reduce symptom severity. In light of this, we developed a guided internet-based emotion regulation training (E-TRAIN) that will be added to CBT. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of E-TRAIN + CBT compared to CBT alone on depressive and anxiety outcomes among adolescents with depressive and/or anxiety disorder. Methods: In this multicenter two-arm randomized controlled trial with parallel group design, we aim to include 138 adolescents, aged 13–19 years, referred for treatment and diagnosed with depressive and/or anxiety disorder. Participants will be allocated to either CBT or CBT + E-TRAIN. Assessments will take place at baseline, and at 3 (T1), 6 (T2) and 12 (T3) months after baseline. We will conduct multi-informant assessments: the adolescent, a parent/caregiver, and the CBT therapist will be asked to fill in questionnaires. The continuous primary outcome measure is self-reported depressive and anxiety symptoms at six months after baseline, measured with the RCADS25. Secondary outcome measures include anxiety or depression diagnosis based on a semi-structured clinical interview, emotion (dys) regulation, and parent-report measures of anxiety, depression and emotion (dys) regulation. Discussion: This study is the first randomized controlled trial to examine the additional value of a guided internet-based emotion regulation training to regular CBT in adolescents with depressive and/or anxiety disorders. If this intervention is effective, it can be implemented in mental health care and improve treatment for these young people. Trial registration: Registered on June 23, 2021 in The Netherlands Trial Register (NL9564). Retrospectively registered. Recruitment started in May 2021 and is ongoing

Effectiveness of a digital alcohol moderation intervention as an add-on to depression treatment for young adults: study protocol of a multicentre pragmatic randomized controlled trial

Background: Depressive disorders and problematic drinking often co-occur, also among young adults. These co-occurring conditions are associated with various negative health outcomes compared to both conditions alone. Early intervention by addressing alcohol use and depressive symptoms simultaneously in the same treatment might improve both conditions. However, evidence on the (cost-) effectiveness of digital combined depression and alcohol interventions for young adults is currently insufficient. We therefore developed an add-on digital alcohol moderation adherence-focussed guided intervention to complement treatment as usual (TAU) for depressive disorders. The digital intervention is a web-app, including 6 modules based on motivational interviewing and cognitive behavioural therapy. This study aims to evaluate the (cost-)effectiveness of a digital alcohol moderation intervention + TAU compared to TAU on alcohol and depression outcomes among young adults with co-occurring depressive disorders and problematic alcohol use.Methods: One hundred fifty-six participants, aged 18-35 years, with problematic alcohol use and a diagnosed depressive disorder will participate in a pragmatic multicentre two-arm randomized controlled trial. Problematic alcohol use is operationalised as scoring >= 5 for women and >= 8 for men on the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT). Participants will be randomized to either the experimental group (digital alcohol intervention + TAU) or control group (TAU only). Participants will be recruited at three Dutch mental health care centres and through social media. Assessments take place at baseline and after 3, 6 and 12 months post-randomization. The primary outcome is treatment response at 6-month follow-up, operationalized as a composite score that combines alcohol use and depression measures and indicates whether treatment has been successful or not. Secondary outcomes are depressive symptoms and alcohol use (i.e. number of weekly standard drinks and AUDIT score). An economic evaluation will be conducted alongside the trial.Discussion: This study evaluates the (cost-) effectiveness of an add-on digital alcohol moderation intervention for young adults who are in treatment for depressive disorders. If proven effective, the digital intervention could be implemented in mental health care and improve treatment for people with co-occurring depressive disorders and problematic alcohol use.</div

Victimization of patients with severe psychiatric disorders: prevalence, risk factors, protective factors and consequences for mental health. A longitudinal study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Victimization among people with a Severe Mental Illness is a common phenomenon. The objectives of this study proposal are: to delineate the extent and kind of victimization in a representative sample of chronic psychiatric patients; to contribute to the development and validation of a set of instruments registering victimization of psychiatric patients; to determine risk factors and protective factors; and to gain insight into the possible consequences of victimization.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>An extensive data set of 323 patients with Sever Mental Illness (assessed 4 years ago) is used. In 2010 a second measurement will be performed, enabling longitudinal research on the predictors and consequences of victimization.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The consequences of (re)victimization have barely been subjected to analysis, partially due to the lack of a comprehensive, conceptual model for victimization. This research project will contribute significantly to the scientific development of the conceptual model of victimization in chronic psychiatric patients.</p

The Amsterdam Studies of Acute Psychiatry I (ASAP-I); A prospective cohort study of determinants and outcome of coercive versus voluntary treatment interventions in a metropolitan area

Background The overall number of involuntary admissions is increasing in many European countries. Patients with severe mental illnesses more often progress to stages in which acute, coercive treatment is warranted. The number of studies that have examined this development and possible consequences in terms of optimizing health care delivery in emergency psychiatry is small and have a number of methodological shortcomings. The current study seeks to examine factors associated with compulsory admissions in the Amsterdam region, taking into account a comprehensive model with four groups of predictors: patient vulnerability, social support, responsiveness of the health care system and treatment adherence. Methods/Design This paper describes the design of the Amsterdam Study of Acute Psychiatry-I (ASAP-I). The study is a prospective cohort study, with one and two-year follow-up, comparing patients with and without forced admission by means of a selected nested case-control design. An estimated total number of 4,600 patients, aged 18 years and over, consecutively coming into contact with the Psychiatric Emergency Service Amsterdam (PESA) are included in the study. From this cohort, a randomly selected group of 125 involuntary admitted subjects and 125 subjects receiving non-coercive treatment are selected for further evaluation and comparison. First, socio-demographic, psychopathological and network characteristics, and prior use of health services will be described for all patients who come into contact with PESA. Second, the in-depth study of compulsory versus voluntary patients will examine which patient characteristics are associated with acute compulsory admission, also taking into account social network and healthcare variables. The third focus of the study is on the associations between patient vulnerability, social support, healthcare characteristics and treatment adherence in a two-year follow-up for patients with or without involuntarily admittance at the index consultation. Discussion The current study seeks to establish a picture of the determinants of acute compulsory admissions in the Netherlands and tries to gain a better understanding of the association with the course of illness and patient's perception of services and treatment adherence. The final aim is to find specific patient and health care factors that can be influenced by adjusting treatment programs in order to reduce the number of involuntary admissions

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy versus Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy in the outpatient treatment of depression: a randomized controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Previous research has shown that Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy (SPSP) is an effective alternative to pharmacotherapy and combined treatment (SPSP and pharmacotherapy) in the treatment of depressed outpatients. The question remains, however, how Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy compares with other established psychotherapy methods. The present study compares Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy to the evidence-based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in terms of acceptability, feasibility, and efficacy in the outpatient treatment of depression. Moreover, this study aims to identify clinical predictors that can distinguish patients who may benefit from either of these treatments in particular. This article outlines the study protocol. The results of the study, which is being currently carried out, will be presented as soon as they are available.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>Adult outpatients with a main diagnosis of major depressive disorder or depressive disorder not otherwise specified according to DSM-IV criteria and mild to severe depressive symptoms (<it>Hamilton Depression Rating Scale </it>score ≥ 14) are randomly allocated to Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy or Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Both treatments are individual psychotherapies consisting of 16 sessions within 22 weeks. Assessments take place at baseline (week 0), during the treatment period (week 5 and 10) and at treatment termination (week 22). In addition, a follow-up assessment takes place one year after treatment start (week 52). Primary outcome measures are the number of patients refusing treatment (acceptability); the number of patients terminating treatment prematurely (feasibility); and the severity of depressive symptoms (efficacy) according to an independent rater, the clinician and the patient. Secondary outcome measures include general psychopathology, general psychotherapy outcome, pain, health-related quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. Clinical predictors of treatment outcome include demographic variables, psychiatric symptoms, cognitive and psychological patient characteristics and the quality of the therapeutic relationship.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This study evaluates Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy as a treatment for depressed outpatients by comparing it to the established evidence-based treatment Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Specific strengths of this study include its strong external validity and the clinical relevance of its research aims. Limitations of the study are discussed.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Current Controlled Trails ISRCTN31263312</p