Cognitive behavioural therapy for adults with dissociative seizures (CODES): a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Dissociative seizures are paroxysmal events resembling epilepsy or syncope with characteristic features that allow them to be distinguished from other medical conditions. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) plus standardised medical care with standardised medical care alone for the reduction of dissociative seizure frequency. METHODS: In this pragmatic, parallel-arm, multicentre randomised controlled trial, we initially recruited participants at 27 neurology or epilepsy services in England, Scotland, and Wales. Adults (≥18 years) who had dissociative seizures in the previous 8 weeks and no epileptic seizures in the previous 12 months were subsequently randomly assigned (1:1) from 17 liaison or neuropsychiatry services following psychiatric assessment, to receive standardised medical care or CBT plus standardised medical care, using a web-based system. Randomisation was stratified by neuropsychiatry or liaison psychiatry recruitment site. The trial manager, chief investigator, all treating clinicians, and patients were aware of treatment allocation, but outcome data collectors and trial statisticians were unaware of treatment allocation. Patients were followed up 6 months and 12 months after randomisation. The primary outcome was monthly dissociative seizure frequency (ie, frequency in the previous 4 weeks) assessed at 12 months. Secondary outcomes assessed at 12 months were: seizure severity (intensity) and bothersomeness; longest period of seizure freedom in the previous 6 months; complete seizure freedom in the previous 3 months; a greater than 50% reduction in seizure frequency relative to baseline; changes in dissociative seizures (rated by others); health-related quality of life; psychosocial functioning; psychiatric symptoms, psychological distress, and somatic symptom burden; and clinical impression of improvement and satisfaction. p values and statistical significance for outcomes were reported without correction for multiple comparisons as per our protocol. Primary and secondary outcomes were assessed in the intention-to-treat population with multiple imputation for missing observations. This trial is registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial registry, ISRCTN05681227, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02325544. FINDINGS: Between Jan 16, 2015, and May 31, 2017, we randomly assigned 368 patients to receive CBT plus standardised medical care (n=186) or standardised medical care alone (n=182); of whom 313 had primary outcome data at 12 months (156 [84%] of 186 patients in the CBT plus standardised medical care group and 157 [86%] of 182 patients in the standardised medical care group). At 12 months, no significant difference in monthly dissociative seizure frequency was identified between the groups (median 4 seizures [IQR 0-20] in the CBT plus standardised medical care group vs 7 seizures [1-35] in the standardised medical care group; estimated incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0·78 [95% CI 0·56-1·09]; p=0·144). Dissociative seizures were rated as less bothersome in the CBT plus standardised medical care group than the standardised medical care group (estimated mean difference -0·53 [95% CI -0·97 to -0·08]; p=0·020). The CBT plus standardised medical care group had a longer period of dissociative seizure freedom in the previous 6 months (estimated IRR 1·64 [95% CI 1·22 to 2·20]; p=0·001), reported better health-related quality of life on the EuroQoL-5 Dimensions-5 Level Health Today visual analogue scale (estimated mean difference 6·16 [95% CI 1·48 to 10·84]; p=0·010), less impairment in psychosocial functioning on the Work and Social Adjustment Scale (estimated mean difference -4·12 [95% CI -6·35 to -1·89]; p<0·001), less overall psychological distress than the standardised medical care group on the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation-10 scale (estimated mean difference -1·65 [95% CI -2·96 to -0·35]; p=0·013), and fewer somatic symptoms on the modified Patient Health Questionnaire-15 scale (estimated mean difference -1·67 [95% CI -2·90 to -0·44]; p=0·008). Clinical improvement at 12 months was greater in the CBT plus standardised medical care group than the standardised medical care alone group as reported by patients (estimated mean difference 0·66 [95% CI 0·26 to 1·04]; p=0·001) and by clinicians (estimated mean difference 0·47 [95% CI 0·21 to 0·73]; p<0·001), and the CBT plus standardised medical care group had greater satisfaction with treatment than did the standardised medical care group (estimated mean difference 0·90 [95% CI 0·48 to 1·31]; p<0·001). No significant differences in patient-reported seizure severity (estimated mean difference -0·11 [95% CI -0·50 to 0·29]; p=0·593) or seizure freedom in the last 3 months of the study (estimated odds ratio [OR] 1·77 [95% CI 0·93 to 3·37]; p=0·083) were identified between the groups. Furthermore, no significant differences were identified in the proportion of patients who had a more than 50% reduction in dissociative seizure frequency compared with baseline (OR 1·27 [95% CI 0·80 to 2·02]; p=0·313). Additionally, the 12-item Short Form survey-version 2 scores (estimated mean difference for the Physical Component Summary score 1·78 [95% CI -0·37 to 3·92]; p=0·105; estimated mean difference for the Mental Component Summary score 2·22 [95% CI -0·30 to 4·75]; p=0·084), the Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7 scale score (estimated mean difference -1·09 [95% CI -2·27 to 0·09]; p=0·069), and the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scale depression score (estimated mean difference -1·10 [95% CI -2·41 to 0·21]; p=0·099) did not differ significantly between groups. Changes in dissociative seizures (rated by others) could not be assessed due to insufficient data. During the 12-month period, the number of adverse events was similar between the groups: 57 (31%) of 186 participants in the CBT plus standardised medical care group reported 97 adverse events and 53 (29%) of 182 participants in the standardised medical care group reported 79 adverse events. INTERPRETATION: CBT plus standardised medical care had no statistically significant advantage compared with standardised medical care alone for the reduction of monthly seizures. However, improvements were observed in a number of clinically relevant secondary outcomes following CBT plus standardised medical care when compared with standardised medical care alone. Thus, adults with dissociative seizures might benefit from the addition of dissociative seizure-specific CBT to specialist care from neurologists and psychiatrists. Future work is needed to identify patients who would benefit most from a dissociative seizure-specific CBT approach. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research, Health Technology Assessment programme

Quetiapine in the treatment of psychosis in Parkinson’s disease

Psychosis (delusions and/or hallucinations) is a common nonmotor feature of Parkinson’s disease (PD). Use of the older ‘typical’ antipsychotic drugs led to worsening of motor symptoms. The introduction of ‘atypical’ antipsychotics opened up a range of therapeutic options. These agents include clozapine, risperidone, olanzapine, aripiprazole and quetiapine. All have been used to treat psychosis in PD with varying success. Clozapine is the only drug with proven efficacy. We review the evidence for the efficacy of quetiapine. Eight open-label studies have assessed quetiapine use in 191 patients, with improvement in psychosis recorded in 152 (80%). In addition to the open-label studies, there have been two single-blind, randomized trials comparing quetiapine and clozapine. These studies suggest that quetiapine has similar efficacy to clozapine in controlling psychosis. Following the promising results of the open-label and clozapine comparison studies, five randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) have been performed to further establish the efficacy of quetiapine. Unfortunately, the results have been disappointing. The only positive placebo-controlled study excluded patients with delusions, which seem to be harder to treat than hallucinations. The four negative RCTs discussed seriously undermine the evidence from the open-label studies. The differences in design and interpretation of the RCTs emphasizes the need for further large, well-controlled trials, using strict inclusion criteria, appropriate psychosis rating scales, carer input and clinical significance. Currently, many physicians continue to cautiously offer a trial of low-dose quetiapine empirically. Clozapine should be considered in patients who can tolerate the required blood monitoring

Epilepsy and concomitant obsessive–compulsive disorder

People with epilepsy (PWE) often suffer psychiatric symptoms which can impact them more than seizures. Affective and psychotic disorders are well recognized as occurring more frequently in PWE than the general population. Less is known about obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) in PWE, despite it being as disabling and distressing. We sought to explore the association between epilepsy and OCD with casereports by identifying ten PWE and concomitant OCD. Demographics, seizure classification, neurological, surgical, psychiatric and psychological treatment as well as quality of life were examined. A detailed analysis was performed for three of them, to explore the lived-experience of patients with the two conditions. This is followed by a discussion of how treatment for co-morbid epilepsy and OCD can be appropriately tailored to be patient specific and provide the greatest potential for improvement. Keywords: Epilepsy, Obsessive–compulsive disorder, Cognitive Behavioural Therapy, SSRI, Quality of lif

Deep brain stimulation:A return journey from psychiatry to neurology

Abstract Deep brain stimulation (DBS) has emerged as an effective neurosurgical tool to treat a range of conditions. Its use in movement disorders such as Parkinson's disease, tremor and dystonia is now well established and has been approved by the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE). The NICE does, however, emphasise the need for a multidisciplinary team to manage these patients. Such a team is traditionally composed of neurologists, neurosurgeons and neuropsychologists. Neuropsychiatrists, however, are increasingly recognised as essential members given many psychiatric considerations that may arise in patients undergoing DBS. Patient selection, assessment of competence to consent and treatment of postoperative psychiatric disease are just a few areas where neuropsychiatric input is invaluable. Partly driven by this close team working and partly based on the early history of DBS for psychiatric disorders, there is increasing interest in re-exploring the potential of neurosurgery to treat patients with psychiatric disease, such as depression and obsessive–compulsive disorder. Although the clinical experience and evidence with DBS in this group of patients are steadily increasing, many questions remain unanswered. Yet, the characteristics of optimal surgical candidates, the best choice of DBS target, the most effective stimulating parameters and the extent of postoperative improvement are not clear for most psychiatric conditions. Further research is therefore required to define how DBS can be best utilised to improve the quality of life of patients with psychiatric disease.</jats:p

A randomized controlled trial of quetiapine for psychosis in Parkinson&amp;rsquo;s disease

Paul Shotbolt1, Michael Samuel2,3, Chris Fox3,4, Anthony S David11Section of Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, King&amp;rsquo;s College, London, UK; 2Department of Neurology, King&amp;rsquo;s College hospital, London, UK; 3East Kent hospitals NHS Trust, William Harvey Hospital, Ashford, Kent, UK; 4Kent and Medway NHS and Social Care and Partnership Trust, Kent, UKIntroduction: Psychosis (delusions and/or hallucinations) is a well-recognized complication of treatment of Parkinson&amp;rsquo;s disease (PD). Quetiapine is a currently favored treatment, but data on its efficacy are equivocal. This trial aimed to provide further evidence on the efficacy of quetiapine in PD psychosis.Methods: We conducted a 12 week double blind randomized placebo-controlled trial. Time to dropout due to lack of improvement of psychosis was the primary outcome measure. Other important secondary outcomes were evaluated using standard rating scales for PD and psychiatric symptoms.Results: Twenty-four eligible subjects gave consent. The primary outcome, time to dropout,&amp;nbsp;was examined using survival analysis. It was shown that patients in the quetiapine group dropped out earlier than those in the placebo group, but this difference was not significant (p = 0.68). No significant changes were found for any of the secondary outcome measures in either group. Conclusions: In this study, quetiapine at doses of up to 150 mg/day failed to significantly improve psychosis compared to placebo, however the small sample size does not allow any conclusive interpretation of the results. Quetiapine did not appear to worsen PD motor functioning, but its use was limited by a faster drop out compared with placebo. Significant impediments were difficulty with recruitment and natural fluctuation in symptoms during the trial. Keywords: Parkinson&amp;rsquo;s disease, psychosis, antipsychotics, quetiapin