Psychoeducation and the family burden in schizophrenia: a randomized controlled trial

Abstract Background The majority of patients with schizophrenia live with their relatives in Pakistan, thereby families experience a considerable burden. We aimed to study the impact of psychoeducation on the burden of schizophrenia on the family in a randomised controlled trial. Methods A total of 108 patients with schizophrenia and their family members from the outpatient department of a teaching hospital in Lahore, Pakistan were randomised. Both groups received psychotropic drugs but one group received psychoeducation in addition. Family burden was assessed at the time of recruitment and at 6 months post intervention. Results In all, 99 patients and their relatives completed the treatment. There was significant reduction in burden at post-intervention assessment in the psychoeducation group based on intention to treat analysis. Conclusion Family psychoeducation can be an important intervention for patients with schizophrenia in Pakistan.</p

Effect of a psycho-educational intervention for family members on caregiver burdens and psychiatric symptoms in patients with schizophrenia in Shiraz, Iran

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This study explored the effectiveness of family psycho-education in reducing patients’ symptoms and on family caregiver burden.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Seventy Iranian outpatients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia disorder and their caregivers were randomly allocated to the experimental (n = 35) or control groups (n = 35). Patients in the experimental group received antipsychotic drug treatment and a psycho-educational program was arranged for their caregivers. The psycho-educational program consisted of ten 90-min sessions held during five weeks (two session in each week). Each caregiver attended 10 sessions (in five weeks) At baseline, immediately after intervention, and one month later. Validated tools were used to assess patients’ clinical status and caregiver burden.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Compared with the control group, the case group showed significantly reduced symptom severity and caregiver burden both immediately after intervention and one month later.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>These results suggest that even need based short-term psycho-educational intervention for family members of Iranian patients with schizophrenic disorder may improve the outcomes of patients and their families.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>IRCT Number:138809122812 N1`</p

Screening for Problem Drinking: Comparison of CAGE and AUDIT

OBJECTIVE: To compare self-administered versions of three questionnaires for detecting heavy and problem drinking: the CAGE, the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT), and an augmented version of the CAGE. DESIGN: Cross-sectional surveys. SETTING: Three Department of Veterans Affairs general medical clinics. PATIENTS: Random sample of consenting male outpatients who consumed at least 5 drinks over the past year (“drinkers”). Heavy drinkers were oversampled. MEASUREMENTS: An augmented version of the CAGE was included in a questionnaire mailed to all patients. The AUDIT was subsequently mailed to “drinkers.” Comparison standards, based on the tri-level World Health Organization alcohol consumption interview and the Diagnostic Interview Schedule, included heavy drinking (>14 drinks per week typically or ≥5 drinks per day at least monthly) and active DSM-IIIR alcohol abuse or dependence (positive diagnosis and at least one alcohol-related symptom in the past year). Areas under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) were used to compare screening questionnaires. MAIN RESULTS: Of 393 eligible patients, 261 (66%) returned the AUDIT and completed interviews. For detection of active alcohol abuse or dependence, the CAGE augmented with three more questions (AUROC 0.871) performed better than either the CAGE alone or AUDIT (AUROCs 0.820 and 0.777, respectively). For identification of heavy-drinking patients, however, the AUDIT performed best (AUROC 0.870). To identify both heavy drinking and active alcohol abuse or dependence, the augmented CAGE and AUDIT both performed well, but the AUDIT was superior (AUROC 0.861). CONCLUSIONS: For identification of patients with heavy drinking or active alcohol abuse or dependence, the self-administered AUDIT was superior to the CAGE in this population