Effectiveness of financial incentives to improve adherence to maintenance treatment with antipsychotics: cluster randomised controlled trial

Objective: To test whether offering financial incentives to patients with psychotic disorders is effective in improving adherence to maintenance treatment with antipsychotics. Design: Cluster randomised controlled trial. Setting: Community mental health teams in secondary psychiatric care in the United Kingdom. Participants: Patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or bipolar disorder, who were prescribed long acting antipsychotic (depot) injections but had received 75% or less of the prescribed injections. We randomly allocated 73 teams with a total of 141 patients. Primary outcome data were available for 35 intervention teams with 75 patients (96% of randomised) and for 31 control teams with 56 patients (89% of randomised). Interventions: Participants in the intervention group were offered £15 (€17; $22) for each depot injection over a 12 month period. Participants in the control condition received treatment as usual. Main outcome measure: The primary outcome was the percentage of prescribed depot injections given during the 12 month intervention period. Results 73 teams with 141 consenting patients were randomised, and outcomes were assessed for 131 patients (93%).⇓ Average baseline adherence was 69% in the intervention group and 67% in the control group. During the 12 month trial period adherence was 85% in the intervention group and 71% in the control group. The adjusted effect estimate was 11.5% (95% confidence interval 3.9% to 19.0%, P=0.003). A secondary outcome was an adherence of ≥95%, which was achieved in 28% of the intervention group and 5% of the control group (adjusted odds ratio 8.21, 95% confidence interval 2.00 to 33.67, P=0.003). Although differences in clinician rated clinical improvement between the groups failed to reach statistical significance, patients in the intervention group had more favourable subjective quality of life ratings (β=0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.26 to 1.15, P=0.002). The number of admissions to hospital and adverse events were low in both groups and did not show substantial differences. Conclusion: Offering modest financial incentives to patients with psychotic disorders is an effective method for improving adherence to maintenance treatment with antipsychotics

Family Caregivers' Experiences of Involuntary Psychiatric Hospital Admissions of Their Relatives – a Qualitative Study

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited

Community treatment orders for patients with psychosis (OCTET): a randomised controlled trial

The trial is funded by a Programme Grant for Applied Research from the National Institute of Health Research (RP-PG-0606–1006

Why do some voluntary patients feel coerced into hospitalisation? A mixed-methods study

This study aimed to investigate factors linked to perceived coercion at admission and during treatment among voluntary inpatients. Quantitative and qualitative methods were used. Two hundred seventy patients were screened for perceived coercion at admission. Those who felt coerced into admission rated their perceived coercion during treatment a month after admission. Patient characteristics and experiences were tested as predictors of coercion. In-depth interviews on experiences leading to perceived coercion were conducted with 36 participants and analysed thematically. Thirty-four percent of patients felt coerced into admission and half of those still felt coerced a month later. No patient characteristics were associated with perceived coercion. Those whose satisfaction with treatment increased more markedly between baseline and a month later were less likely to feel coerced a month after admission. In the qualitative interviews three themes leading to perceived coercion were identified: viewing the hospital as ineffective and other treatments as more appropriate, not participating in the admission and treatment and not feeling respected. Involving patients in the decision-making and treating them with respect may reduce perceived coercion

Cost-effectiveness of financial incentives to promote adherence to depot antipsychotic medication: economic evaluation of a cluster-randomised controlled trial

Background: Offering a modest financial incentive to people with psychosis can promote adherence to depot antipsychotic medication, but the cost-effectiveness of this approach has not been examined. Methods: Economic evaluation within a pragmatic cluster-randomised controlled trial. 141 patients under the care of 73 teams (clusters) were randomised to intervention or control; 138 patients with diagnoses of schizophrenia, schizo-affective disorder or bipolar disorder participated. Intervention participants received £15 per depot injection over 12 months, additional to usual acute, mental and community primary health services. The control group received usual health services. Main outcome measures: incremental cost per 20% increase in adherence to depot antipsychotic medication; incremental cost of ‘good’ adherence (defined as taking at least 95% of the prescribed number of depot medications over the intervention period). Findings: Economic and outcome data for baseline and 12-month follow-up were available for 117 participants. The adjusted difference in adherence between groups was 12.2% (73.4% control vs. 85.6% intervention); the adjusted costs difference was £598 (95% CI -£4 533, £5 730). The extra cost per patient to increase adherence to depot medications by 20% was £982 (95% CI -£8 020, £14 000). The extra cost per patient of achieving 'good' adherence was £2 950 (CI -£19 400, £27 800). Probability of cost-effectiveness exceeded 97.5%at willingness-to-pay values of £14 000 for a 20% increase in adherence and £27 800 for good adherence. Interpretation: Offering a modest financial incentive to people with psychosis is cost-effective in promoting adherence to depot antipsychotic medication. Direct healthcare costs (including costs of the financial incentive) are unlikely to be increased by this intervention. Trial Registration: ISRCTN.com 7776928

Intravenous immunoglobulin and rituximab versus placebo treatment of antibody-associated psychosis: study protocol of a randomised phase IIa double-blinded placebo-controlled trial (SINAPPS2)

Abstract: Background: Evidence is conflicting about a causal role of inflammation in psychosis and, specifically, regarding antibodies binding to neuronal membrane targets, especially N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors. NMDAR, LGI1 and GABA-A antibodies were found more prevalent in people with psychosis than in healthy controls. We aim to test whether these antibodies are pathogenic and may cause isolated psychosis. The SINAPPS2 phase IIa double-blinded randomised controlled trial will test the efficacy and safety of immunoglobulin and rituximab treatment versus placebo for patients with acute psychosis symptoms as added to psychiatric standard of care. Methods: We will screen approximately 2500 adult patients with acute psychosis to identify 160 with antibody-positive psychosis without co-existing neurological disease and recruit about 80 eligible participants to the trial in the period from September 2017 to September 2021 across the UK. Eligible patients will be randomised 1:1 either to intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) followed by rituximab or to placebo infusions of 1% albumin followed by 0.9% sodium chloride, respectively. To detect a time-to-symptomatic-recovery hazard ratio of 0.322 with a power of 80%, 56 participants are needed to complete the trial, allowing for up to 12 participants to drop out of each group. Eligible patients will be randomised and assessed at baseline within 4 weeks of their eligibility confirmation. The treatment will start with IVIG or 1% albumin placebo infusions over 2–4 consecutive days no later than 7 days from baseline. It will continue 4–5 weeks later with a rituximab or sodium chloride placebo infusion and will end 2–3 weeks after this with another rituximab or placebo infusion. The primary outcome is the time to symptomatic recovery defined as symptomatic remission sustained for at least 6 months on the following Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale items: P1, P2, P3, N1, N4, N6, G5 and G9. Participants will be followed for 12 months from the first day of treatment or, where sustained remission begins after the first 6 months, for an additional minimum of 6 months to assess later response. Discussion: The SINAPPS2 trial aims to test whether immunotherapy is efficacious and safe in psychosis associated with anti-neuronal membrane antibodies. Trial registration: ISRCTN, 11177045. Registered on 2 May 2017. EudraCT, 2016-000118-31. Registered on 22 November 2016. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03194815. Registered on 21 June 2017

The associations of informal coercion with legal compulsion, clinical outcomes and the therapeutic relationship in community mental health care

In addition to involuntary treatment, patients with severe mental illness are routinely subject to other pressures such as leverage to improve their adherence to treatment. Little clinical or research attention has been given to these pressures and their associations with both involuntary treatment and clinical outcomes are poorly understood. My thesis aims to test whether the imposing of compulsion affects patients' experience of leverage and whether leverage affects treatment outcomes. It also examines whether patients' relationships with clinicians influence their perception of the coerciveness of involuntary treatment. The thesis begins with a scoping review of current knowledge about non-legislated pressures and identifies their widespread use and limited associations with patient characteristics and outcomes. My empirical studies find that involuntary and voluntary patients do not report different rates of leverage, that leverage is not related to better outcomes, and that the therapeutic relationship does not moderate perceived coercion. My studies suggest that involuntary treatment does not liberate patients from other pressures, but there is also no evidence that clinicians were more controlling with involuntary patients. Unlike legal compulsion, the use of leverage may be a more integral part of clinical practice rather than a considered strategy. Such pressures restrict patient autonomy but their use is neither monitored nor regulated. I found no justification for them in benefits to patients. In contrast to the positive effects of 'procedural justice' I found no evidence that the therapeutic relationship independently alters perceived coercion. Policies and formal training should increase clinicians’ awareness of non-statutory pressures to improve their skills and reduce coercion.</p