Cognitive behaviour therapy versus other psychosocial treatments for schizophrenia

Expression level of myocardial enzymes in patients with schizophrenia: Predictive value in the occurrence of violence

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenic patients are prone to violence, frequent recurrence, and difficult to predict. Emotional and behavioral abnormalities during the onset of the disease, resulting in active myocardial enzyme spectrum.

AIM

To explored the expression level of myocardial enzymes in patients with schizophrenia and its predictive value in the occurrence of violence.

METHODS

A total of 288 patients with schizophrenia in our hospital from February 2023 to January 2024 were selected as the research object, and 100 healthy people were selected as the control group. Participants' information, clinical data, and laboratory examination data were collected. According to Modified Overt Aggression Scale score, patients were further divided into the violent (123 cases) and non-violent group (165 cases).

RESULTS

The comparative analysis revealed significant differences in serum myocardial enzyme levels between patients with schizophrenia and healthy individuals. In the schizophrenia group, the violent and non-violent groups also exhibited different levels of serum myocardial enzymes. The levels of myocardial enzymes in the non-violent group were lower than those in the violent group, and the patients in the latter also displayed aggressive behavior in the past.

CONCLUSION

Previous aggressive behavior and the level of myocardial enzymes are of great significance for the diagnosis and prognosis analysis of violent behavior in patients with schizophrenia. By detecting changes in these indicators, we can gain a more comprehensive understanding of a patient's condition and treatment.

Interventions to address parenting stress among caregivers of children with chronic diseases: An umbrella review

BACKGROUND

Caregivers of children with chronic diseases suffer from great parenting pressure, which directly affects the treatment and rehabilitation of children, reduces the quality of life of caregivers and damages family functioning. Existing reviews have not systematically summarized and evaluated interventions for parenting stress in caregivers of children with chronic diseases.

DATA SOURCES

Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, OVID, CNKI, CBM, Wan Fang and Cochrane Library were searched for eligible reviews in November 2021 and October 2022.

METHODS

Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, reviewed full texts of articles for eligibility, and appraised the quality of reviews using JBI. The quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE. Findings are reported in accordance with PRISMA checklist. Narrative summaries grouped findings by intervention types.

RESULTS

Out of 2632 records, we included 21 systematic reviews for a synthesis. Interventions for parenting stress in children with chronic diseases were divided into seven categories. Cognitive behavioural interventions, psychosocial interventions, child behavioural and/or developmental parent interventions and synthesized interventions have shown high-level evidence in reducing parenting stress for caregivers of children with chronic diseases. Furthermore, outcome measures and intervention protocols were highly heterogeneous across interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

This umbrella review suggest that reducing the parenting stress of caregivers of children with chronic diseases can directly target caregivers' parenting stress through cognitive behavioural interventions/psychosocial interventions and/or provide guidance to parents on the behavioural and developmental problems of children with chronic diseases. A more standardized approach to outcome measures is essential to assess efficacy and compare interventions across studies.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The findings provide information and evidence for reducing parenting stress among caregivers of children with chronic diseases to guide the development of comprehensive intervention strategies.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Patient or public contribution does not apply to this study.

Psychological interventions for depression in adolescent and adult congenital heart disease

BACKGROUND

Despite improvements in medical care, the quality of life of adults and adolescents with congenital heart disease remains strongly affected by their condition, often leading to depression. Psychotherapy, cognitive behavioural therapy, and other talking therapies may be effective in treating depression in both adults and young adults with congenital heart disease. The aim of this review was to assess the effects of treatments, such as psychotherapy, cognitive behavioural therapies, and talking therapies for treating depression in this population.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects (both harms and benefits) of psychological interventions for reducing symptoms of depression in adolescents (aged 10 to 17 years) and adults with congenital heart disease. Psychological interventions include cognitive behavioural therapy, psychotherapy, or 'talking/counselling' therapy for depression.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated searches from the 2013 Cochrane Review by searching CENTRAL, four other databases, and Conference Proceedings Citation Index to 7 March 2023, and two clinical trial registers to February 2021. We applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing psychological interventions to no intervention in the congenital heart disease population, aged 10 years and older, with depression.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts, and independently assessed full-text reports for inclusion. Further information was sought from the authors if needed. Data were extracted in duplicate. We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome was a change in depression. Our secondary outcomes were: acceptability of treatment, quality of life, hospital re-admission, non-fatal cardiovascular events, cardiovascular behavioural risk factor, health economics, cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for our primary outcome only.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified three new RCTs (480 participants). Participants were adults with congenital heart disease. Included studies varied in intervention length (90 minutes to 3 months) and follow-up (3 to 12 months), with depression assessed post-intervention and at follow-up. Risk of bias assessment identified an overall low risk of bias for the main outcome of depression. Psychological interventions (talking/counselling therapy) may reduce depression more than usual care at both three-month (mean difference (MD) -1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.84 to -0.30; P = 0.006; I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs, 156 participants; low-certainty evidence), and 12-month follow-up (MD -1.02, 95% CI -1.92 to -0.13; P = 0.02; I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs, 287 participants; low-certainty evidence). There was insufficient evidence to draw conclusions about the impact of psychological interventions on quality of life. None of the included studies reported on our other outcomes of interest. Due to the low number of studies included, we did not undertake any subgroup analyses. One study awaits classification.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Psychological interventions may reduce depression in adults with congenital heart disease compared to usual care. However, the certainty of the evidence is low. Further research is needed to establish the role of psychological interventions in this population, defining the optimal duration, method of administration, and number of sessions required to obtain the greatest benefit.

Effect of cognitive behavioral group therapy on rehabilitation of community patients with schizophrenia: A short-term randomized control trial

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of cognitive behavioral group therapy (CBGT) for cognitive dys-function and negative symptoms of schizophrenia is established, but more evidence is required.

AIM

To assess the effectiveness of CBGT combined with mental health education as a treatment for schizophrenia compared with mental health education alone.

METHODS

In all, 120 schizophrenia out-patients were randomized into CBGT combined with mental health education or single mental health education. The primary outcomes were positive and negative symptoms, cognitive function, excitatory factor, anxiety and depression symptom improvements on the positive and negative syndrome scale score. Secondary outcome measures included social function and drug compliance.

RESULTS

There were significant differences between CBGT combined with mental health education and single mental health education on measures of positive and negative symptoms, cognitive functions, excitatory factor, anxiety and depression symptoms, and social functions. No other significant difference in outcomes was observed.

CONCLUSION

CBGT combined with mental health education may be relevant beneficial treatment method in reducing symptoms, cognitive and social functions of patients with schizophrenia.

Cognitive behavioural therapy (group) for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia is a disabling psychotic disorder characterised by positive symptoms of delusions, hallucinations, disorganised speech and behaviour; and negative symptoms such as affective flattening and lack of motivation. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is a psychological intervention that aims to change the way in which a person interprets and evaluates their experiences, helping them to identify and link feelings and patterns of thinking that underpin distress. CBT models targeting symptoms of psychosis (CBTp) have been developed for many mental health conditions including schizophrenia. CBTp has been suggested as a useful add-on therapy to medication for people with schizophrenia. While CBT for people with schizophrenia was mainly developed as an individual treatment, it is expensive and a group approach may be more cost-effective. Group CBTp can be defined as a group intervention targeting psychotic symptoms, based on the cognitive behavioural model. In group CBTp, people work collaboratively on coping with distressing hallucinations, analysing evidence for their delusions, and developing problem-solving and social skills. However, the evidence for effectiveness is far from conclusive.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate efficacy and acceptability of group CBT applied to psychosis compared with standard care or other psychosocial interventions, for people with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.

SEARCH METHODS

On 10 February 2021, we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials, which is based on CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, four other databases and two trials registries. We handsearched the reference lists of relevant papers and previous systematic reviews and contacted experts in the field for supplemental data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised controlled trials allocating adults with schizophrenia to receive either group CBT for schizophrenia, compared with standard care, or any other psychosocial intervention (group or individual).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We complied with Cochrane recommended standard of conduct for data screening and collection. Where possible, we calculated risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for binary data and mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous data. We used a random-effects model for analyses. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and created a summary of findings table using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

The review includes 24 studies (1900 participants). All studies compared group CBTp with treatments that a person with schizophrenia would normally receive in a standard mental health service (standard care) or any other psychosocial intervention (group or individual). None of the studies compared group CBTp with individual CBTp. Overall risk of bias within the trials was moderate to low. We found no studies reporting data for our primary outcome of clinically important change. With regard to numbers of participants leaving the study early, group CBTp has little or no effect compared to standard care or other psychosocial interventions (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.59; studies = 13, participants = 1267; I2 = 9%; low-certainty evidence). Group CBTp may have some advantage over standard care or other psychosocial interventions for overall mental state at the end of treatment for endpoint scores on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total (MD -3.73, 95% CI -4.63 to -2.83; studies = 12, participants = 1036; I2 = 5%; low-certainty evidence). Group CBTp seems to have little or no effect on PANSS positive symptoms (MD -0.45, 95% CI -1.30 to 0.40; studies =8, participants = 539; I2 = 0%) and on PANSS negative symptoms scores at the end of treatment (MD -0.73, 95% CI -1.68 to 0.21; studies = 9, participants = 768; I2 = 65%). Group CBTp seems to have an advantage over standard care or other psychosocial interventions on global functioning measured by Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF; MD -3.61, 95% CI -6.37 to -0.84; studies = 5, participants = 254; I2 = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence), Personal and Social Performance Scale (PSP; MD 3.30, 95% CI 2.00 to 4.60; studies = 1, participants = 100), and Social Disability Screening Schedule (SDSS; MD -1.27, 95% CI -2.46 to -0.08; studies = 1, participants = 116). Service use data were equivocal with no real differences between treatment groups for number of participants hospitalised (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.60; studies = 3, participants = 235; I2 = 34%). There was no clear difference between group CBTp and standard care or other psychosocial interventions endpoint scores on depression and quality of life outcomes, except for quality of life measured by World Health Organization Quality of Life Assessment Instrument (WHOQOL-BREF) Psychological domain subscale (MD -4.64, 95% CI -9.04 to -0.24; studies = 2, participants = 132; I2 = 77%). The studies did not report relapse or adverse effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Group CBTp appears to be no better or worse than standard care or other psychosocial interventions for people with schizophrenia in terms of leaving the study early, service use and general quality of life. Group CBTp seems to be more effective than standard care or other psychosocial interventions on overall mental state and global functioning scores. These results may not be widely applicable as each study had a low sample size. Therefore, no firm conclusions concerning the efficacy of group CBTp for people with schizophrenia can currently be made. More high-quality research, reporting useable and relevant data is needed.

Digital smartphone intervention to recognise and manage early warning signs in schizophrenia to prevent relapse: the EMPOWER feasibility cluster RCT

BACKGROUND

Relapse is a major determinant of outcome for people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia. Early warning signs frequently precede relapse. A recent Cochrane Review found low-quality evidence to suggest a positive effect of early warning signs interventions on hospitalisation and relapse.

OBJECTIVE

How feasible is a study to investigate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a digital intervention to recognise and promptly manage early warning signs of relapse in schizophrenia with the aim of preventing relapse?

DESIGN

A multicentre, two-arm, parallel-group cluster randomised controlled trial involving eight community mental health services, with 12-month follow-up.

SETTINGS

Glasgow, UK, and Melbourne, Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

Service users were aged > 16 years and had a schizophrenia spectrum disorder with evidence of a relapse within the previous 2 years. Carers were eligible for inclusion if they were nominated by an eligible service user.

INTERVENTIONS

The Early signs Monitoring to Prevent relapse in psychosis and prOmote Wellbeing, Engagement, and Recovery (EMPOWER) intervention was designed to enable participants to monitor changes in their well-being daily using a mobile phone, blended with peer support. Clinical triage of changes in well-being that were suggestive of early signs of relapse was enabled through an algorithm that triggered a check-in prompt that informed a relapse prevention pathway, if warranted.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcomes were feasibility of the trial and feasibility, acceptability and usability of the intervention, as well as safety and performance. Candidate co-primary outcomes were relapse and fear of relapse.

RESULTS

We recruited 86 service users, of whom 73 were randomised (42 to EMPOWER and 31 to treatment as usual). Primary outcome data were collected for 84% of participants at 12 months. Feasibility data for people using the smartphone application (app) suggested that the app was easy to use and had a positive impact on motivations and intentions in relation to mental health. Actual app usage was high, with 91% of users who completed the baseline period meeting our a priori criterion of acceptable engagement (> 33%). The median time to discontinuation of > 33% app usage was 32 weeks (95% confidence interval 14 weeks to ∞). There were 8 out of 33 (24%) relapses in the EMPOWER arm and 13 out of 28 (46%) in the treatment-as-usual arm. Fewer participants in the EMPOWER arm had a relapse (relative risk 0.50, 95% confidence interval 0.26 to 0.98), and time to first relapse (hazard ratio 0.32, 95% confidence interval 0.14 to 0.74) was longer in the EMPOWER arm than in the treatment-as-usual group. At 12 months, EMPOWER participants were less fearful of having a relapse than those in the treatment-as-usual arm (mean difference -4.29, 95% confidence interval -7.29 to -1.28). EMPOWER was more costly and more effective, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £3041. This incremental cost-effectiveness ratio would be considered cost-effective when using the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained.

LIMITATIONS

This was a feasibility study and the outcomes detected cannot be taken as evidence of efficacy or effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

A trial of digital technology to monitor early warning signs that blended with peer support and clinical triage to detect and prevent relapse is feasible.

FUTURE WORK

A main trial with a sample size of 500 (assuming 90% power and 20% dropout) would detect a clinically meaningful reduction in relapse (relative risk 0.7) and improvement in other variables (effect sizes 0.3-0.4).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered as ISRCTN99559262.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 27. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. Funding in Australia was provided by the National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1095879).

Brain activity and connectivity differences in reward value discrimination during effort computation in schizophrenia

Negative symptoms in the motivational domain are strongly correlated with deficits in social and occupational functioning in schizophrenia. However, the neural substrates underlying these symptoms remain largely unknown. Twenty-eight adults with schizophrenia and twenty healthy volunteers underwent functional magnetic resonance while completing a lottery game designed to capture reward-related cognitive processes. Each trial demanded an initial investment of effort in form of key presses to increase the odds of winning. Brain activity in response to different reward cues (1 euro versus 1 cent) was compared between groups. Whereas controls invested more effort in improving their chances to win 1 euro compared to 1 cent in the lottery game, patients invested similarly high amounts of effort in both reward conditions. The neuroimaging analysis revealed lower neural activity in the bilateral caudate and cingulo-opercular circuits and decreased effective connectivity between reward-associated areas and neural nodes in the frontoparietal and salience network in response to high- versus low-reward conditions in schizophrenia patients compared to controls. Effective connectivity differences across conditions were associated with amotivation symptoms in patients. Overall, our data provide the evidence of alterations in neural activity in the caudate and cingulo-opercular "task maintenance" circuits and frontoparietal effective connectivity with reward-associated nodes as possible underlying mechanisms of reward value discrimination deficits affecting effort computation in schizophrenia.

Psychosocial interventions for self-harm in adults

BACKGROUND

Self-harm (SH; intentional self-poisoning or self-injury regardless of degree of suicidal intent or other types of motivation) is a growing problem in most counties, often repeated, and associated with suicide. There has been a substantial increase in both the number of trials and therapeutic approaches of psychosocial interventions for SH in adults. This review therefore updates a previous Cochrane Review (last published in 2016) on the role of psychosocial interventions in the treatment of SH in adults.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of psychosocial interventions for self-harm (SH) compared to comparison types of care (e.g. treatment-as-usual, routine psychiatric care, enhanced usual care, active comparator) for adults (aged 18 years or older) who engage in SH.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Specialised Register, the Cochrane Library (Central Register of Controlled Trials [CENTRAL] and Cochrane Database of Systematic reviews [CDSR]), together with MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and PsycINFO (to 4 July 2020).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing interventions of specific psychosocial treatments versus treatment-as-usual (TAU), routine psychiatric care, enhanced usual care (EUC), active comparator, or a combination of these, in the treatment of adults with a recent (within six months of trial entry) episode of SH resulting in presentation to hospital or clinical services. The primary outcome was the occurrence of a repeated episode of SH over a maximum follow-up period of two years. Secondary outcomes included treatment adherence, depression, hopelessness, general functioning, social functioning, suicidal ideation, and suicide.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently selected trials, extracted data, and appraised trial quality. For binary outcomes, we calculated odds ratio (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). For continuous outcomes, we calculated mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) and 95% CIs. The overall quality of evidence for the primary outcome (i.e. repetition of SH at post-intervention) was appraised for each intervention using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included data from 76 trials with a total of 21,414 participants. Participants in these trials were predominately female (61.9%) with a mean age of 31.8 years (standard deviation [SD] 11.7 years). On the basis of data from four trials, individual cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT)-based psychotherapy may reduce repetition of SH as compared to TAU or another comparator by the end of the intervention (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.02; N = 238; k = 4; GRADE: low certainty evidence), although there was imprecision in the effect estimate. At longer follow-up time points (e.g., 6- and 12-months) there was some evidence that individual CBT-based psychotherapy may reduce SH repetition. Whilst there may be a slightly lower rate of SH repetition for dialectical behaviour therapy (DBT) (66.0%) as compared to TAU or alternative psychotherapy (68.2%), the evidence remains uncertain as to whether DBT reduces absolute repetition of SH by the post-intervention assessment. On the basis of data from a single trial, mentalisation-based therapy (MBT) reduces repetition of SH and frequency of SH by the post-intervention assessment (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.73; N = 134; k = 1; GRADE: high-certainty evidence). A group-based emotion-regulation psychotherapy may also reduce repetition of SH by the post-intervention assessment based on evidence from two trials by the same author group (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.88; N = 83; k = 2; moderate-certainty evidence). There is probably little to no effect for different variants of DBT on absolute repetition of SH, including DBT group-based skills training, DBT individual skills training, or an experimental form of DBT in which participants were given significantly longer cognitive exposure to stressful events. The evidence remains uncertain as to whether provision of information and support, based on the Suicide Trends in At-Risk Territories (START) and the SUicide-PREvention Multisite Intervention Study on Suicidal behaviors (SUPRE-MISS) models, have any effect on repetition of SH by the post-intervention assessment. There was no evidence of a difference for psychodynamic psychotherapy, case management, general practitioner (GP) management, remote contact interventions, and other multimodal interventions, or a variety of brief emergency department-based interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, there were significant methodological limitations across the trials included in this review. Given the moderate or very low quality of the available evidence, there is only uncertain evidence regarding a number of psychosocial interventions for adults who engage in SH. Psychosocial therapy based on CBT approaches may result in fewer individuals repeating SH at longer follow-up time points, although no such effect was found at the post-intervention assessment and the quality of evidence, according to the GRADE criteria, was low. Given findings in single trials, or trials by the same author group, both MBT and group-based emotion regulation therapy should be further developed and evaluated in adults. DBT may also lead to a reduction in frequency of SH. Other interventions were mostly evaluated in single trials of moderate to very low quality such that the evidence relating to the use of these interventions is inconclusive at present.

Interventions for self-harm in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Self-harm (SH; intentional self-poisoning or self-injury regardless of degree of suicidal intent or other types of motivation) is a growing problem in most countries, often repeated, and associated with suicide. Evidence assessing the effectiveness of interventions in the treatment of SH in children and adolescents is lacking, especially when compared with the evidence for psychosocial interventions in adults. This review therefore updates a previous Cochrane Review (last published in 2015) on the role of interventions for SH in children and adolescents.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of psychosocial interventions or pharmacological agents or natural products for SH compared to comparison types of care (e.g. treatment-as-usual, routine psychiatric care, enhanced usual care, active comparator, placebo, alternative pharmacological treatment, or a combination of these) for children and adolescents (up to 18 years of age) who engage in SH.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Specialized Register, the Cochrane Library (Central Register of Controlled Trials [CENTRAL] and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews [CDSR]), together with MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and PsycINFO (to 4 July 2020).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing specific psychosocial interventions or pharmacological agents or natural products with treatment-as-usual (TAU), routine psychiatric care, enhanced usual care (EUC), active comparator, placebo, alternative pharmacological treatment, or a combination of these, in children and adolescents with a recent (within six months of trial entry) episode of SH resulting in presentation to hospital or clinical services. The primary outcome was the occurrence of a repeated episode of SH over a maximum follow-up period of two years. Secondary outcomes included treatment adherence, depression, hopelessness, general functioning, social functioning, suicidal ideation, and suicide.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently selected trials, extracted data, and appraised trial quality. For binary outcomes, we calculated odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence internals (CIs). For continuous outcomes, we calculated the mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) and 95% CIs. The overall quality of evidence for the primary outcome (i.e. repetition of SH at post-intervention) was appraised for each intervention using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included data from 17 trials with a total of 2280 participants. Participants in these trials were predominately female (87.6%) with a mean age of 14.7 years (standard deviation (SD) 1.5 years). The trials included in this review investigated the effectiveness of various forms of psychosocial interventions. None of the included trials evaluated the effectiveness of pharmacological agents in this clinical population. There was a lower rate of SH repetition for DBT-A (30%) as compared to TAU, EUC, or alternative psychotherapy (43%) on repetition of SH at post-intervention in four trials (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.82; N = 270; k = 4; high-certainty evidence). There may be no evidence of a difference for individual cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT)-based psychotherapy and TAU for repetition of SH at post-intervention (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.12 to 7.24; N = 51; k = 2; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether mentalisation based therapy for adolescents (MBT-A) reduces repetition of SH at post-intervention as compared to TAU (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.06 to 8.46; N = 85; k = 2; very low-certainty evidence). Heterogeneity for this outcome was substantial ( I² = 68%). There is probably no evidence of a difference between family therapy and either TAU or EUC on repetition of SH at post-intervention (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.49 to 2.07; N = 191; k = 2; moderate-certainty evidence). However, there was no evidence of a difference for compliance enhancement approaches on repetition of SH by the six-month follow-up assessment, for group-based psychotherapy at the six- or 12-month follow-up assessments, for a remote contact intervention (emergency cards) at the 12-month assessment, or for therapeutic assessment at the 12- or 24-month follow-up assessments.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Given the moderate or very low quality of the available evidence, and the small number of trials identified, there is only uncertain evidence regarding a number of psychosocial interventions in children and adolescents who engage in SH. Further evaluation of DBT-A is warranted. Given the evidence for its benefit in adults who engage in SH, individual CBT-based psychotherapy should also be further developed and evaluated in children and adolescents.

Cognitive-behavioural therapy for a variety of conditions: an overview of systematic reviews and panoramic meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cognitive-behavioural therapy aims to increase quality of life by changing cognitive and behavioural factors that maintain problematic symptoms. A previous overview of cognitive-behavioural therapy systematic reviews suggested that cognitive-behavioural therapy was effective for many conditions. However, few of the included reviews synthesised randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVES

This project was undertaken to map the quality and gaps in the cognitive-behavioural therapy systematic review of randomised controlled trial evidence base. Panoramic meta-analyses were also conducted to identify any across-condition general effects of cognitive-behavioural therapy.

DATA SOURCES

The overview was designed with cognitive-behavioural therapy patients, clinicians and researchers. The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Child Development & Adolescent Studies, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and OpenGrey databases were searched from 1992 to January 2019.

REVIEW METHODS

Study inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) fulfil the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination criteria; (2) intervention reported as cognitive-behavioural therapy or including one cognitive and one behavioural element; (3) include a synthesis of cognitive-behavioural therapy trials; (4) include either health-related quality of life, depression, anxiety or pain outcome; and (5) available in English. Review quality was assessed with A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR)-2. Reviews were quality assessed and data were extracted in duplicate by two independent researchers, and then mapped according to condition, population, context and quality. The effects from high-quality reviews were pooled within condition groups, using a random-effect panoramic meta-analysis. If the across-condition heterogeneity was I2 < 75%, we pooled across conditions. Subgroup analyses were conducted for age, delivery format, comparator type and length of follow-up, and a sensitivity analysis was performed for quality.

RESULTS

A total of 494 reviews were mapped, representing 68% (27/40) of the categories of the International Classification of Diseases, Eleventh Revision, Mortality and Morbidity Statistics. Most reviews (71%, 351/494) were of lower quality. Research on older adults, using cognitive-behavioural therapy preventatively, ethnic minorities and people living outside Europe, North America or Australasia was limited. Out of 494 reviews, 71 were included in the primary panoramic meta-analyses. A modest effect was found in favour of cognitive-behavioural therapy for health-related quality of life (standardised mean difference 0.23, 95% confidence interval 0.05 to 0.41, prediction interval -0.05 to 0.50, I2 = 32%), anxiety (standardised mean difference 0.30, 95% confidence interval 0.18 to 0.43, prediction interval -0.28 to 0.88, I2 = 62%) and pain (standardised mean difference 0.23, 95% confidence interval 0.05 to 0.41, prediction interval -0.28 to 0.74, I2 = 64%) outcomes. All condition, subgroup and sensitivity effect estimates remained consistent with the general effect. A statistically significant interaction effect was evident between the active and non-active comparator groups for the health-related quality-of-life outcome. A general effect for depression outcomes was not produced as a result of considerable heterogeneity across reviews and conditions.

LIMITATIONS

Data extraction and analysis were conducted at the review level, rather than returning to the individual trial data. This meant that the risk of bias of the individual trials could not be accounted for, but only the quality of the systematic reviews that synthesised them.

CONCLUSION

Owing to the consistency and homogeneity of the highest-quality evidence, it is proposed that cognitive-behavioural therapy can produce a modest general, across-condition benefit in health-related quality-of-life, anxiety and pain outcomes.

FUTURE WORK

Future research should focus on how the modest effect sizes seen with cognitive-behavioural therapy can be increased, for example identifying alternative delivery formats to increase adherence and reduce dropout, and pursuing novel methods to assess intervention fidelity and quality.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017078690.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 9. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Diagnosis and treatment depression in schizophrenia

Depression is the third most common illness among patients with schizophrenia which negatively affects the course of the disease and significantly contributes to the mortality rate, due to increased suicide. Depression, along with negative symptoms and cognitive deficits, is one of the main factors that significantly decreases the quality of life and the disease prognosis in patients with schizophrenia. In addition, depression increases the frequency of exacerbations and readmissions, decreases the quality and duration of remissions and is associated with more frequent substance abuse and an increased economic burden. Data on the prevalence of depression among patients with schizophrenia are contradictory and are associated with a low detection rate of depression in such patients, a lack of clear diagnostic criteria and difficulties in differentiation between extrapyramidal and negative symptoms. The average prevalence of depression that meets the diagnostic criteria of major depressive episodes in patients with schizophrenia is 25% at a specific point, and 60% over the course of a lifetime; the frequency of subsyndromal depression is much higher. It is essential to distinguish between primary (axial syndrome) and secondary depressive symptoms (extrapyramidal symptoms, psychogenic or nosogenic reactions, social factors, etc.) to determine treatment strategies. The published data relating to randomized clinical trials for the development of evidence-based guidelines are limited. Current recommendations are based mainly on the results of small-scale trials and reviews. Certain atypical antipsychotics (quetiapine, lurasidone, amisulpride, aripiprazole, olanzapine, clozapine) are superior to typical antipsychotics in the reduction of depressive symptoms. Clozapine is effective in the management of patients at risk from suicide. The additional prescription of antidepressants, transcranial magnetic stimulation and electroconvulsive therapy are not always effective and are only possible following the management of acute psychosis in cases when antipsychotic monotherapy proved to be ineffective.

Fostering coping as a mechanism of symptom change in cognitive behavioural therapy for psychosis

INTRODUCTION

Cognitive behavioural therapy for psychosis (CBTp) has been repeatedly shown to ameliorate psychotic symptoms. However, so far we have little understanding of the mechanisms of change in CBTp. In this study, we tested whether improved cognitive and behavioural efforts to manage taxing external or internal demands (=coping) constitute a mechanism of change in CBTp.

METHODS

Using data from a published trial for a secondary analysis, we tested whether the continuous symptomatic improvement of patients (n = 57) who received up to 45 sessions of CBTp and completed weekly self-assessments of symptoms (suspiciousness, individualised positive and negative symptoms, and individualised symptoms of depression) was mediated by preceding improvement in self-assessed coping using multilevel analysis. A reverse model in which symptom improvement predicted improved coping was also tested.

RESULTS

Continuous improvement in suspiciousness, negative symptoms, and depression over the course of CBTp was preceded by improvement in coping. Improvement in suspiciousness or positive symptoms did not predict subsequent improvement in coping, whereas improvement in negative symptoms and depression predicted subsequent improvement in coping.

CONCLUSION

Coping constitutes a mechanism of change, albeit to a different extent for different symptom clusters. Further research needs to explore how best to utilise this mechanism and optimise its integration with other active ingredients of CBTp to maximise therapeutic gain.

Psychosocial interventions for people with both severe mental illness and substance misuse

BACKGROUND

Even low levels of substance misuse by people with a severe mental illness can have detrimental effects.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of psychosocial interventions for reduction in substance use in people with a serious mental illness compared with standard care.

SEARCH METHODS

The Information Specialist of the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group (CSG) searched the CSG Trials Register (2 May 2018), which is based on regular searches of major medical and scientific databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing psychosocial interventions for substance misuse with standard care in people with serious mental illness.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently selected studies, extracted data and appraised study quality. For binary outcomes, we calculated standard estimates of risk ratio (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous outcomes, we calculated the mean difference (MD) between groups. Where meta-analyses were possible, we pooled data using a random-effects model. Using the GRADE approach, we identified seven patient-centred outcomes and assessed the quality of evidence for these within each comparison.

MAIN RESULTS

Our review now includes 41 trials with a total of 4024 participants. We have identified nine comparisons within the included trials and present a summary of our main findings for seven of these below. We were unable to summarise many findings due to skewed data or because trials did not measure the outcome of interest. In general, evidence was rated as low- or very-low quality due to high or unclear risks of bias because of poor trial methods, or inadequately reported methods, and imprecision due to small sample sizes, low event rates and wide confidence intervals. 1. Integrated models of care versus standard care (36 months) No clear differences were found between treatment groups for loss to treatment (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.45; participants = 603; studies = 3; low-quality evidence), death (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.39 to 3.57; participants = 421; studies = 2; low-quality evidence), alcohol use (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.56; participants = 143; studies = 1; low-quality evidence), substance use (drug) (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.25; participants = 85; studies = 1; low-quality evidence), global assessment of functioning (GAF) scores (MD 0.40, 95% CI -2.47 to 3.27; participants = 170; studies = 1; low-quality evidence), or general life satisfaction (QOLI) scores (MD 0.10, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.38; participants = 373; studies = 2; moderate-quality evidence). 2. Non-integrated models of care versus standard care There was no clear difference between treatment groups for numbers lost to treatment at 12 months (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.99; participants = 134; studies = 3; very low-quality evidence). 3. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) versus standard care There was no clear difference between treatment groups for numbers lost to treatment at three months (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.86; participants = 152; studies = 2; low-quality evidence), cannabis use at six months (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.15; participants = 47; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence) or mental state insight (IS) scores by three months (MD 0.52, 95% CI -0.78 to 1.82; participants = 105; studies = 1; low-quality evidence). 4. Contingency management versus standard care We found no clear differences between treatment groups for numbers lost to treatment at three months (RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.11; participants = 255; studies = 2; moderate-quality evidence), number of stimulant positive urine tests at six months (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.06; participants = 176; studies = 1) or hospitalisations (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.93; participants = 176; studies = 1); both low-quality evidence. 5. Motivational interviewing (MI) versus standard care We found no clear differences between treatment groups for numbers lost to treatment at six months (RR 1.71, 95% CI 0.63 to 4.64; participants = 62; studies = 1). A clear difference, favouring MI, was observed for abstaining from alcohol (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.75; participants = 28; studies = 1) but not other substances (MD -0.07, 95% CI -0.56 to 0.42; participants = 89; studies = 1), and no differences were observed in mental state general severity (SCL-90-R) scores (MD -0.19, 95% CI -0.59 to 0.21; participants = 30; studies = 1). All very low-quality evidence. 6. Skills training versus standard care At 12 months, there were no clear differences between treatment groups for numbers lost to treatment (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.20 to 10.10; participants = 122; studies = 3) or death (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.42; participants = 121; studies = 1). Very low-quality, and low-quality evidence, respectively. 7. CBT + MI versus standard care At 12 months, there was no clear difference between treatment groups for numbers lost to treatment (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.59; participants = 327; studies = 1; low-quality evidence), number of deaths (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.76; participants = 603; studies = 4; low-quality evidence), relapse (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.04; participants = 36; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence), or GAF scores (MD 1.24, 95% CI -1.86 to 4.34; participants = 445; studies = 4; very low-quality evidence). There was also no clear difference in reduction of drug use by six months (MD 0.19, 95% CI -0.22 to 0.60; participants = 119; studies = 1; low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We included 41 RCTs but were unable to use much data for analyses. There is currently no high-quality evidence to support any one psychosocial treatment over standard care for important outcomes such as remaining in treatment, reduction in substance use or improving mental or global state in people with serious mental illnesses and substance misuse. Furthermore, methodological difficulties exist which hinder pooling and interpreting results. Further high-quality trials are required which address these concerns and improve the evidence in this important area.

Treatment-Resistant to Antipsychotics: A Resistance to Everything? Psychotherapy in Treatment-Resistant Schizophrenia and Nonaffective Psychosis: A 25-Year Systematic Review and Exploratory Meta-Analysis

Background: Roughly 30% of schizophrenia patients fail to respond to at least two antipsychotic trials. Psychosis has been traditionally considered to be poorly sensitive to psychotherapy. Nevertheless, there is increasing evidence that psychological interventions could be considered in treatment-resistant psychosis (TRP). Despite the relevance of the issue and the emerging neurobiological underpinnings, no systematic reviews have been published. Here, we show a systematic review of psychotherapy interventions in TRP patients of the last 25 years. Methods: The MEDLINE/PubMed, ISI WEB of Knowledge, and Scopus databases were inquired from January 1, 1993, to August 1, 2018, for reports documenting augmentation or substitution with psychotherapy for treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) and TRP patients. Quantitative data fetched by Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) were pooled for explorative meta-analysis. Results: Forty-two articles have been found. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) was the most frequently recommended psychotherapy intervention for TRS (studies, n = 32, 76.2%), showing efficacy for general psychopathology and positive symptoms as documented by most of the studies, but with uncertain efficacy on negative symptoms. Other interventions showed similar results. The usefulness of group therapy was supported by the obtained evidence. Few studies focused on negative symptoms. Promising results were also reported for resistant early psychosis. Limitations: Measurement and publication bias due to the intrinsic limitations of the appraised original studies. Conclusions: CBT, psychosocial intervention, supportive counseling, psychodynamic psychotherapy, and other psychological interventions can be recommended for clinical practice. More studies are needed, especially for non-CBT interventions and for all psychotherapies on negative symptoms.

Yoga as part of a package of care versus non-standard care for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Yoga is an ancient body-mind practice which originated in India and is popular in the Western world as a form of relaxation and exercise. It has been of interest for people with schizophrenia to determine the efficacy of yoga delivered as a package of care versus non-standard care.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effects of yoga as part of a package of care versus non-standard care for schizophrenia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (latest 15 May 2018) which is based on regular searches of MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, BIOSS, AMED, PsychINFO, and registries of clinical trials. We searched the references of all included studies. There are no language, date, document type, or publication status limitations for inclusion of records in the register.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) including people with schizophrenia comparing yoga as part of a package of care with non-standard care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

There were no data to analyse as no studies met the inclusion criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

The searches identified 30 studies that could be relevant to this review. After careful inspection, 29 were excluded and one is awaiting classification. No data were available for analyses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In view of the lack of evidence from RCTs, it is currently not possible for us to comment on the use of yoga as part of a package of care versus non-standard care.

An Overview of the Evidence for Psychological Interventions for Psychosis: Results From Meta-Analyses

There are numerous psychological approaches to psychosis that differ in focus, specificity and formats. These include psychodynamic, humanistic, cognitive-behavioural and third-wave-approaches, psychoeducation, various types of training-based approaches and family interventions.

We briefly describe the main aims and focus of each of these approaches, followed by a review of their evidence-base in regard to improvement in symptoms, relapse and functioning. We conducted a systematic search for meta-analyses dating to 2017 for each of the approaches reviewed. Where numerous meta-analyses for an approach were available, we selected the most recent, comprehensive and methodologically sound ones.

We found convincing short- and long-term evidence for cognitive behavioural approaches if the main aim is to reduce symptom distress. Evidence is also strong for psychoeducative family interventions that include skills training if the main aim is to reduce relapse and rehospitalisation. Acceptance and commitment therapy, mindfulness-based approaches, meta-cognitive and social skills training, as well as systemic family interventions, were also found to be efficacious, depending on the outcome of interest, but meta-analyses for these approaches were based on a comparatively lower number of outcome studies and a narrower selection of outcome measures. We found no convincing evidence for psychodynamic approaches, humanistic approaches or patient-directed psychoeducation (without including the family).

An array of evidence-based psychological therapies is available for psychotic disorders from which clinicians and patients can choose, guided by the strength of the evidence and depending on the outcome area focused on. Increased effort is needed in terms of dissemination and implementation of these therapies into clinical practice.

Meta-analyses show convincing evidence for CBT if the main target is psychotic symptoms.

Meta-analyses show convincing evidence for family interventions if the main target is relapse.

Effects are promising for ACT, mindfulness-based and systemic approaches, but more research is needed.

The array of effective approaches allows clinicians and patients to select the most appropriate one.

Response rates in patients with schizophrenia and positive symptoms receiving cognitive behavioural therapy: a systematic review and single-group meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cognitive behavioural therapy has been used for schizophrenia, but to which extent it is effective is still controversial. Results of existing meta-analyses are of difficult interpretation, because they mainly present effect sizes in the form of standardized mean differences between intervention and control groups based on rating scales, which are of unclear clinical meaning. No meta-analysis has considered the number of patients responding to treatment yet. Based on this ground, we present the first meta-analysis examining the response rates of patients with schizophrenia and positive symptoms to cognitive behavioural therapy.

METHODS

We searched multiple databases for randomized controlled trials on psychological interventions of schizophrenia including patients with positive symptoms, and included for this analysis the studies on cognitive behavioural therapy (last search: January 2018). We applied a validated imputation method to calculate the number of responders from rating scales for the outcomes overall symptoms and positive symptoms, based on two criteria, at least 20% and at least 50% reduction from baseline on PANSS or BPRS total scores. Data were pooled in a single-group summary meta-analysis using R software. Additionally, several potential moderators of response to cognitive behavioural therapy were examined by subgroup and meta-regression analyses. The protocol has been registered in PROSPERO (CRD42017067795).

RESULTS

We included 33 studies with a total of 1142 participants receiving cognitive behavioural therapy. On average, 44.5 and 13.2% of the patients reached a 20% (minimally improved) and 50% (much improved) reduction of overall symptoms. Similarly, 52.9 and 24.8% of the patients reached a 20%/50% reduction of positive symptoms. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses revealed a better treatment response in overall symptoms for patients that were not treatment resistant and in studies with researchers' allegiance. Of borderline significance was the better response in studies employing expert therapists and in patients that were more severely ill at baseline. Blinding of outcome assessor, number of sessions, treatment duration, age and gender were not significant moderators of response.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that adding cognitive behavioural therapy to pharmacotherapy brings about a minimal improvement in overall symptoms among 44.5% of its recipients. Several study and patients characteristics can moderate response rates.

Cognitive behavioural therapy plus standard care versus standard care plus other psychosocial treatments for people with schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is a psychosocial treatment that aims to help individuals re-evaluate their appraisals of their experiences that can affect their level of distress and problematic behaviour. CBT is now recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) as an add-on treatment for people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia. Other psychosocial therapies that are often less expensive are also available as an add-on treatment for people with schizophrenia. This review is also part of a family of Cochrane Reviews on CBT for people with schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of CBT compared with other psychosocial therapies as add-on treatments for people with schizophrenia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study Based Register of Trials (latest 6 March, 2017). This register is compiled by systematic searches of major resources (including AMED, BIOSIS CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, and registries of clinical trials) and their monthly updates, handsearches, grey literature, and conference proceedings, with no language, date, document type, or publication status limitations for inclusion of records into the register.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving people with schizophrenia who were randomly allocated to receive, in addition to their standard care, either CBT or any other psychosocial therapy. Outcomes of interest included relapse, global state, mental state, adverse events, social functioning, quality of life and satisfaction with treatment. We included trials meeting our inclusion criteria and reporting useable data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We reliably screened references and selected trials. Review authors, working independently, assessed trials for methodological quality and extracted data from included studies. We analysed dichotomous data on an intention-to-treat basis and continuous data with 60% completion rate. Where possible, for binary data we calculated risk ratio (RR), for continuous data we calculated mean difference (MD), all with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a fixed-effect model for analyses unless there was unexplained high heterogeneity. We assessed risk of bias for the included studies and used the GRADE approach to produce a 'Summary of findings' table for our main outcomes of interest.

MAIN RESULTS

The review now includes 36 trials with 3542 participants, comparing CBT with a range of other psychosocial therapies that we classified as either active (A) (n = 14) or non active (NA) (n = 14). Trials were often small and at high or unclear risk of bias. When CBT was compared with other psychosocial therapies, no difference in long-term relapse was observed (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.29; participants = 375; studies = 5, low-quality evidence). Clinically important change in global state data were not available but data for rehospitalisation were reported. Results showed no clear difference in long term rehospitalisation (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.14; participants = 943; studies = 8, low-quality evidence) nor in long term mental state (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.01; participants = 249; studies = 4, low-quality evidence). No long-term differences were observed for death (RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.62 to 3.98; participants = 627; studies = 6, low-quality evidence). Only average endpoint scale scores were available for social functioning and quality of life. Social functioning scores were similar between groups (long term Social Functioning Scale (SFS): MD 8.80, 95% CI -4.07 to 21.67; participants = 65; studies = 1, very low-quality evidence), and quality of life scores were also similar (medium term Modular System for Quality of Life (MSQOL): MD -4.50, 95% CI -15.66 to 6.66; participants = 64; studies = 1, very low-quality evidence). There was a modest but clear difference favouring CBT for satisfaction with treatment - measured as leaving the study early (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.99; participants = 2392; studies = 26, low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence based on data from randomised controlled trials indicates there is no clear and convincing advantage for cognitive behavioural therapy over other - and sometimes much less sophisticated and expensive - psychosocial therapies for people with schizophrenia. It should be noted that although much research has been carried out in this area, the quality of evidence available is mostly low or of very low quality. Good quality research is needed before firm conclusions can be made.

Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for Psychosis: A Health Technology Assessment

BACKGROUND

Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for psychosis is a distinct type of psychotherapy that has been recommended together with antipsychotic drugs and comprehensive usual care in the management of schizophrenia, a complex mental health disorder associated with a high economic and societal burden. The objectives of this report were to assess the effectiveness, harms, cost-effectiveness, and lived experience of CBT for psychosis in improving outcomes for adults with a primary diagnosis of schizophrenia.

METHODS

We performed literature searches on March 28 and April 5, 2017, and undertook a qualitative synthesis of systematic reviews of the clinical and economic literature comparing CBT for psychosis with any comparator interventions (e.g., usual care, waitlist control, or pharmacotherapy) in adults with a diagnosis of schizophrenia as defined by any criteria (including related disorders such as schizoaffective disorder).We developed an individual-level state-transition probabilistic model for a hypothetical cohort of adults aged 18 years and older starting with first-episode psychosis. We compared three strategies: usual care, CBT for psychosis by physicians, and CBT for psychosis by regulated nonphysician therapists. The CBT was provided in person together with usual care including pharmacotherapy: 16 structured sessions (individual or group) for first-episode psychosis and 24 individual sessions for relapse or treatment-resistant disease. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) over 5 years using the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care perspective and a discount rate of 1.5%. We also estimated the 5-year budget impact of publicly funding CBT for psychosis in Ontario.In addition, we interviewed 13 people with lived experience of schizophrenia and psychosis about their values and preferences surrounding CBT and other treatments.

RESULTS

CBT for psychosis compared with usual care significantly improved overall psychotic symptoms (standard mean difference [SMD] -0.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.45 to -0.21), positive symptoms (e.g., hallucinations) (SMD -0.34, 95% CI -0.58 to -0.10), auditory symptoms (SMD 0.39, 95% Cl not reported, P < .005), delusions (SMD 0.33, 95% CI not reported, P < .05) and negative symptoms (e.g., blunt affect) (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.04) at end of treatment. No significant differences were observed for social function, distress associated with psychosis, relapse, or quality of life.Compared with any control, CBT for psychosis significantly improved overall psychotic symptoms, positive symptoms, auditory hallucinations, delusions, and negative symptoms. Compared with other forms of therapy, CBT for psychosis showed inconsistent results at end of treatment for overall psychotic symptoms, positive symptoms, auditory hallucinations, and delusions. In people with first-episode psychosis, CBT for psychosis was not significantly more effective for the prevention of relapse when compared with other forms of therapy or usual care (odds ratio [OR] 1.11, 95% CI 0.63-1.95 and OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.65-2.04, respectively).Low-intensity CBT for psychosis (fewer than 16 face-to-face sessions) compared with any type of treatment significantly improved overall psychotic symptoms and social function at follow-up (SMD -0.40, 95% CI -0.74 to -0.06 and SMD -0.57, 95% CI -0.81 to -0.33, respectively).In the cost-utility analysis, CBT for psychosis provided by nonphysician therapists compared with usual care was associated with increases in both quality-adjusted life-years (mean 0.1159 QALYs, 95% credible interval [CrI] 0.09-0.14) and costs (mean $2,494, 95% Crl $1,472-$3,544), yielding an ICER of $21,520 per QALY gained. CBT for psychosis provided by physicians was dominated because it was equally effective but more expensive (mean $2,976, 95% CrI $2,822-$3,129; ICER of CBT for psychosis vs. usual care: $47,196/QALY gained).Assuming a 20% increase in access per year (from 0% at baseline to 100% in year 5), we estimated the total 5-year net budget impact of publicly funding CBT for psychosis would be about $15.2 million for nonphysician providers and about $35.4 million if provided by psychiatrists. It is estimated that by the year 2021, approximately 110 nonphysician therapists or 150 physicians would be needed to provide CBT for psychosis to more than 12,000 adults with schizophrenia (including about 8,500 incident cases) in Ontario.People with schizophrenia and their family members reported positive experiences with CBT for psychosis. They felt it provided effective tools to help manage their schizophrenia but stressed that it was only effective in conjunction with medication to control psychotic episodes and overcome a patient's denial of illness. Geographic and financial barriers have restricted access to this psychotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with usual care or any control, CBT for psychosis significantly improved psychotic symptoms, based on evidence of moderate to adequate quality; no significant improvements were observed for social function, relapse, or quality of life outcomes. People affected by schizophrenia reported that CBT for psychosis was valuable in conjunction with antipsychotic medication but that access to this type of psychotherapy is limited. Adding CBT for psychosis to usual care in the management of adult schizophrenia probably represents good value for money in Ontario. Depending on the type of provider, therapy format, and rate of access, the net budget impact to Ontario's publicly funded health system would likely be between $15 million to $35 million over the next 5 years.

Psychological interventions to reduce positive symptoms in schizophrenia: systematic review and network meta-analysis

Psychological treatments are increasingly regarded as useful interventions for schizophrenia. However, a comprehensive evaluation of the available evidence is lacking and the benefit of psychological interventions for patients with current positive symptoms is still debated. The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of psychological treatments for positive symptoms of schizophrenia by applying a network meta-analysis approach, that can integrate direct and indirect comparisons. We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, BIOSIS, Cochrane Library, World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized controlled trials of psychological treatments for positive symptoms of schizophrenia, published up to January 10, 2018. We included studies on adults with a diagnosis of schizophrenia or a related disorder presenting positive symptoms. The primary outcome was change in positive symptoms measured with validated rating scales. We included 53 randomized controlled trials of seven psychological interventions, for a total of 4,068 participants receiving the psychological treatment as add-on to antipsychotics. On average, patients were moderately ill at baseline. The network meta-analysis showed that cognitive behavioural therapy (40 studies) reduced positive symptoms more than inactive control (standardized mean difference, SMD=-0.29; 95% CI: -0.55 to -0.03), treatment as usual (SMD=-0.30; 95% CI: -0.45 to -0.14) and supportive therapy (SMD=-0.47; 95% CI: -0.91 to -0.03). Cognitive behavioural therapy was associated with a higher dropout rate compared with treatment as usual (risk ratio, RR=0.74; 95% CI: 0.58 to 0.95). Confidence in the estimates ranged from moderate to very low. The other treatments contributed to the network with a lower number of studies. Results were overall consistent in sensitivity analyses controlling for several factors, including the role of researchers' allegiance and blinding of outcome assessor. Cognitive behavior therapy seems to be effective on positive symptoms in moderately ill patients with schizophrenia, with effect sizes in the lower to medium range, depending on the control condition.

Psychotherapy in Psychosis: Experiences of Fully Recovered Service Users

Background: Despite the evidence of the importance of including service users' views on psychotherapy after psychosis, there is a paucity of research investigating impact on full recovery. Objectives: To explore what fully recovered service users found to be the working ingredients of psychotherapy in the recovery process after psychosis. Materials and Methods: The study was designed as a phenomenological investigation with thematic analysis as the practical tool for analysis. Twenty fully recovered service users were interviewed. Results: Themes: (1) Help with the basics, (2) Having a companion when moving through chaotic turf, (3) Creating a common language, (4) Putting psychosis in brackets and cultivate all that is healthy, and (5) Building a bridge from the psychotic state to the outside world. Conclusion: Therapeutic approaches sensitive to stage specific functional challenges seemed crucial for counteracting social isolation and achieving full recovery. Findings indicate that psychotherapy focusing on early readjustment to everyday activities, to what are perceived as meaningful and recovery-oriented, seems to be what is preferred and called for by service users.

Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for schizophrenia - outcomes for functioning, distress and quality of life: a meta-analysis

Background

The effect of cognitive behavioural therapy for psychosis (CBTp) on the core symptoms of schizophrenia has proven contentious, with current meta-analyses finding at most only small effects. However, it has been suggested that the effects of CBTp in areas other than psychotic symptoms are at least as important and potentially benefit from the intervention.

Method

We meta-analysed RCTs investigating the effectiveness of CBTp for functioning, distress and quality of life in individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia and related disorders. Data from 36 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) met our inclusion criteria- 27 assessing functioning (1579 participants); 8 for distress (465 participants); and 10 for quality of life (592 participants).

Results

The pooled effect size for functioning was small but significant for the end-of-trial (0.25: 95% CI: 0.14 to 0.33); however, this became non-significant at follow-up (0.10 [95%CI -0.07 to 0.26]). Although a small benefit of CBT was evident for reducing distress (0.37: 95%CI 0.05 to 0.69), this became nonsignificant when adjusted for possible publication bias (0.18: 95%CI -0.12 to 0.48). Finally, CBTp showed no benefit for improving quality of life (0.04: 95% CI: -0.12 to 0.19).

Conclusions

CBTp has a small therapeutic effect on functioning at end-of-trial, although this benefit is not evident at follow-up. Although CBTp produced a small benefit on distress, this was subject to possible publication bias and became nonsignificant when adjusted. We found no evidence that CBTp increases quality of life post-intervention.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s40359-018-0243-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Psychological interventions for positive symptoms in schizophrenia: protocol for a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

There is rising awareness that we need multidisciplinary approaches integrating psychological treatments for schizophrenia, but a comprehensive evidence based on their relative efficacy is lacking. We will conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA), integrating direct and indirect comparisons from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to rank psychological treatments for schizophrenia according to their efficacy, acceptability and tolerability.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will include all RCTs comparing a psychological treatment aimed at positive symptoms of schizophrenia with another psychological intervention or with a no treatment condition (waiting-list and treatment as usual). We will include studies on adult patients with schizophrenia, excluding specific subpopulations (eg, first-episode patients or patients with psychiatric comorbidities). Primary outcome will be the change in positive symptoms on a published rating scale. Secondary outcomes will be acceptability (dropout), change in overall and negative symptoms of schizophrenia, response, relapse, adherence, depression, quality of life, functioning and adverse events. Published and unpublished studies will be sought through database searches, trial registries and websites. Study selection and data extraction will be conducted by at least two independent reviewers. We will conduct random-effects NMA to synthesise all evidences for each outcome and obtain a comprehensive ranking of all treatments. NMA will be conducted in Stata and R within a frequentist framework. The risk of bias in studies will be evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the credibility of the evidence will be evaluated using an adaptation of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework to NMA, recommended by the Cochrane guidance. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be conducted to assess the robustness of the findings.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

No ethical issues are foreseen. Results from this study will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant conferences.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42017067795.

Supportive psychodynamic psychotherapy for psychosis

The UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance suggests that psychodynamic principles may be used to understand the experiences of people with psychosis. In this article we consider the application of psychodynamic principles in psychotherapy for psychosis, focusing on one particular model: supportive psychodynamic psychotherapy (SPP). We describe this approach with a detailed fictitious case example and discuss how SPP has developed through significant modifications of classical psychoanalytic therapy and the evidence base for it. We consider its overlap with cognitive–behavioural therapy, its advantages and disadvantages, and the arguments for making SPP available as a treatment option in services for psychosis.

Yoga as part of a package of care versus standard care for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Yoga is an ancient spiritual practice that originated in India and is currently accepted in the Western world as a form of relaxation and exercise. It has been of interest for people with schizophrenia to determine the efficacy of yoga delivered as a package of care versus standard care.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effects of yoga as a package of care versus standard care.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (latest 30 March 2017) which is based on regular searches of MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, BIOSS, AMED, PsychINFO, and registries of clinical trials. We searched the references of all included studies. There are no language, date, document type, or publication status limitations for inclusion of records in the register.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) including people with schizophrenia comparing yoga as a package of care with standard-care control.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The review authors independently selected studies, quality rated these, and extracted data. For binary outcomes, we calculated risk difference (RD) and its 95% confidence interval (CI), on an intention-to-treat (ITT) basis. For continuous data, we estimated the mean difference (MD) between groups and its CI. We employed mixed-effect and fixed-effect models for analysis. We examined heterogeneity (I² technique), assessed risk of bias for included studies, and created a 'Summary of findings' table using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation).

MAIN RESULTS

Three studies are included in this review. All outcomes were short term (less than eight weeks). Useable data were reported for two outcomes only; leaving the study early and quality of life. None of the participants left the studies early and there was some evidence in favour of the yoga package for quality of life endpoint scores (1 RCT, n=80, MD 22.93 CI 19.74 to 26.12, low-quality evidence). Leaving the study early data were equivocal between the treatment groups (3 RCTs, n=193, RD 0.06 CI -0.01 to 0.13, medium-quality evidence, high heterogeneity). Overall, this review has an inordinate number of missing key outcomes, which included mental and global state, social functioning, physical health, adverse effects and costs of care.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A small number of small studies were included in this review and these lacked many key outcomes. The sparse data means we cannot state with any degree of certainty if yoga delivered as a package of care is beneficial in comparison to standard care.

Yoga versus non-standard care for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Yoga is an ancient spiritual practice that originated in India and is currently accepted in the Western world as a form of relaxation and exercise. It has been of interest for people with schizophrenia as an alternative or adjunctive treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically assess the effects of yoga versus non-standard care for people with schizophrenia.

SEARCH METHODS

The Information Specialist of the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group searched their specialised Trials Register (latest 30 March 2017), which is based on regular searches of MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, BIOSIS, AMED, PsycINFO, and registries of clinical trials. We searched the references of all included studies. There are no language, date, document type, or publication status limitations for inclusion of records in the register.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) including people with schizophrenia and comparing yoga with non-standard care. We included trials that met our selection criteria and reported useable data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The review team independently selected studies, assessed quality, and extracted data. For binary outcomes, we calculated risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI), on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, we estimated the mean difference (MD) between groups and its 95% CI. We employed a fixed-effect models for analyses. We examined data for heterogeneity (I2 technique), assessed risk of bias for included studies, and created a 'Summary of findings' table for seven main outcomes of interest using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation).

MAIN RESULTS

We were able to include six studies (586 participants). Non-standard care consisted solely of another type of exercise programme. All outcomes were short term (less than six months). There was a clear difference in the outcome leaving the study early (6 RCTs, n=586, RR 0.64 CI 0.49 to 0.83, medium quality evidence) in favour of the yoga group. There were no clear differences between groups for the remaining outcomes. These included mental state (improvement in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, 1 RCT, n=84, RR 0.81 CI 0.62 to 1.07, low quality evidence), social functioning (improvement in Social Occupational Functioning Scale, 1 RCT, n=84, RR 0.90 CI 0.78 to 1.04, low quality evidence), quality of life (mental health) (average change 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) quality-of-life sub-scale, 1 RCT, n=69, MD -5.30 CI -17.78 to 7.18, low quality evidence), physical health, (average change WHOQOL-BREF physical-health sub-scale, 1 RCT, n=69, MD 9.22 CI -0.42 to 18.86, low quality evidence). Only one study reported adverse effects, finding no incidence of adverse events in either treatment group. There were a considerable number of missing outcomes, which included relapse, change in cognition, costs of care, effect on standard care, service intervention, disability, and activities of daily living.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found minimal differences between yoga and non-standard care, the latter consisting of another exercise comparator, which could be broadly considered aerobic exercise. Outcomes were largely based on single studies with limited sample sizes and short-term follow-up. Overall, many outcomes were not reported and evidence presented in this review is of low to moderate quality - too weak to indicate that yoga is superior or inferior to non-standard care control for management of people with schizophrenia.

Effectiveness of metacognitive interventions for mental disorders in adults: a systematic review protocol (METACOG)

INTRODUCTION

Whereas the efficacy of cognitive-behavioural therapy has been demonstrated for a variety of mental disorders, there is still need for improvement, especially regarding less prevalent or more severe disorders. Recently, metacognitive interventions have been developed and are now available for a variety of diagnoses. Still, a systematic review investigating the effectiveness of different metacognitive interventions for various mental disorders is missing.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cross-over and cluster RCTs and non-randomised controlled trials on metacognitive interventions (ie, metacognitive therapy, metacognitive training, others) in adults with any mental disorder will be included. As comparators, another psychological or pharmacological treatment, a combined psychological and pharmacological treatment, treatment as usual or no active treatment are eligible. Outcomes refer to efficacy and acceptability of metacognitive interventions.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

In light of the popularity of metacognitive interventions, the systematic review will provide researchers, clinicians and patients with substantial information on the intervention's effectiveness across different mental disorders. Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated through a patient workshop.

Music therapy for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like disorders

BACKGROUND

Music therapy is a therapeutic approach that uses musical interaction as a means of communication and expression. Within the area of serious mental disorders, the aim of the therapy is to help people improve their emotional and relational competencies, and address issues they may not be able to using words alone.

OBJECTIVES

To review the effects of music therapy, or music therapy added to standard care, compared with placebo therapy, standard care or no treatment for people with serious mental disorders such as schizophrenia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Trials Study-Based Register (December 2010 and 15 January, 2015) and supplemented this by contacting relevant study authors, handsearching of music therapy journals and manual searches of reference lists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared music therapy with standard care, placebo therapy, or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently selected, quality assessed and data extracted studies. We excluded data where more than 30% of participants in any group were lost to follow-up. We synthesised non-skewed continuous endpoint data from valid scales using a standardised mean difference (SMD). We employed a fixed-effect model for all analyses. If statistical heterogeneity was found, we examined treatment dosage (i.e. number of therapy sessions) and treatment approach as possible sources of heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

Ten new studies have been added to this update; 18 studies with a total 1215 participants are now included. These examined effects of music therapy over the short, medium, and long-term, with treatment dosage varying from seven to 240 sessions. Overall, most information is from studies at low or unclear risk of biasA positive effect on global state was found for music therapy compared to standard care (medium term, 2 RCTs, n = 133, RR 0.38 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24 to 0.59, low-quality evidence, number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome NNTB 2, 95% CI 2 to 4). No binary data were available for other outcomes. Medium-term continuous data identified good effects for music therapy on negative symptoms using the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms (3 RCTs, n = 177, SMD - 0.55 95% CI -0.87 to -0.24, low-quality evidence). General mental state endpoint scores on the Positive and Negative Symptoms Scale were better for music therapy (2 RCTs, n = 159, SMD -0.97 95% CI -1.31 to -0.63, low-quality evidence), as were average endpoint scores on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (1 RCT, n = 70, SMD -1.25 95% CI -1.77 to -0.73, moderate-quality evidence). Medium-term average endpoint scores using the Global Assessment of Functioning showed no effect for music therapy on general functioning (2 RCTs, n = 118, SMD -0.19 CI -0.56 to 0.18, moderate-quality evidence). However, positive effects for music therapy were found for both social functioning (Social Disability Screening Schedule scores; 2 RCTs, n = 160, SMD -0.72 95% CI -1.04 to -0.40), and quality of life (General Well-Being Schedule scores: 1 RCT, n = 72, SMD 1.82 95% CI 1.27 to 2.38, moderate-quality evidence). There were no data available for adverse effects, service use, engagement with services, or cost.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate- to low-quality evidence suggests that music therapy as an addition to standard care improves the global state, mental state (including negative and general symptoms), social functioning, and quality of life of people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like disorders. However, effects were inconsistent across studies and depended on the number of music therapy sessions as well as the quality of the music therapy provided. Further research should especially address the long-term effects of music therapy, dose-response relationships, as well as the relevance of outcome measures in relation to music therapy.

Psychological treatments for mental disorders in adults: A review of the evidence of leading international organizations

Most mental health services throughout the world currently regard evidence-based psychological treatments as best practice for the treatment of mental disorders. The aim of this study was to analyze evidence-based treatments drawn from RCTs, reviews, meta-analyses, guides, and lists provided by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), Division 12 (Clinical Psychology) of the American Psychological Association (APA), Cochrane and the Australian Psychological Society (APS) in relation to mental disorders in adults. A total of 135 treatments were analyzed for 23 mental disorders and compared to determine the level of agreement among the organizations. The results indicate that, in most cases, there is little agreement among organizations and that there are several discrepancies within certain disorders. These results require reflection on the meaning attributed to evidence-based practice with regard to psychological treatments. The possible reasons for these differences are discussed. Based on these findings, proposals to unify the criteria that reconcile the realities of clinical practice with a scientific perspective were analyzed.

Effective patient–clinician interaction to improve treatment outcomes for patients with psychosis: a mixed-methods design

Background

At least 100,000 patients with schizophrenia receive care from community mental health teams (CMHTs) in England. These patients have regular meetings with clinicians, who assess them, engage them in treatment and co-ordinate care. As these routine meetings are not commonly guided by research evidence, a new intervention, DIALOG, was previously designed to structure consultations. Using a hand-held computer, clinicians asked patients to rate their satisfaction with eight life domains and three treatment aspects, and to indicate whether or not additional help was needed in each area, with responses being graphically displayed and compared with previous ratings. In a European multicentre trial, the intervention improved patients’ quality of life over a 1-year period. The current programme builds on this research by further developing DIALOG in the UK.

Research questions

(1) How can the practical procedure of the intervention be improved, including the software used and the design of the user interface? (2) How can elements of resource-oriented interventions be incorporated into a clinician manual and training programme for a new, more extensive ‘DIALOG+’ intervention? (3) How effective and cost-effective is the new DIALOG+ intervention in improving treatment outcomes for patients with schizophrenia or a related disorder? (4) What are the views of patients and clinicians regarding the new DIALOG+ intervention?

Methods

We produced new software on a tablet computer for CMHTs in the NHS, informed by analysis of videos of DIALOG sessions from the original trial and six focus groups with 18 patients with psychosis. We developed the new ‘DIALOG+’ intervention in consultation with experts, incorporating principles of solution-focused therapy when responding to patients’ ratings and specifying the procedure in a manual and training programme for clinicians. We conducted an exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial with 49 clinicians and 179 patients with psychosis in East London NHS Foundation Trust, comparing DIALOG+ with an active control. Clinicians working as care co-ordinators in CMHTs (along with their patients) were cluster randomised 1 : 1 to either DIALOG+ or treatment as usual plus an active control, to prevent contamination. Intervention and control were to be administered monthly for 6 months, with data collected at baseline and at 3, 6 and 12 months following randomisation. The primary outcome was subjective quality of life as measured on the Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of Life; secondary outcomes were also measured. We also established the cost-effectiveness of the DIALOG intervention using data from the Client Service Receipt Inventory, which records patients’ retrospective reports of using health- and social-care services, including hospital services, outpatient services and medication, in the 3 months prior to each time point. Data were supplemented by the clinical notes in patients’ medical records to improve accuracy. We conducted an exploratory thematic analysis of 16 video-recorded DIALOG+ sessions and measured adherence in these videos using a specially developed adherence scale. We conducted focus groups with patients (n = 19) and clinicians (n = 19) about their experiences of the intervention, and conducted thematic analyses. We disseminated the findings and made the application (app), manual and training freely available, as well as producing a protocol for a definitive trial.

Results

Patients receiving the new intervention showed more favourable quality of life in the DIALOG+ group after 3 months (effect size: Cohen’sd = 0.34), after 6 months (Cohen’sd = 0.29) and after 12 months (Cohen’sd = 0.34). An analysis of video-recorded DIALOG+ sessions showed inconsistent implementation, with adherence to the intervention being a little over half of the possible score. Patients and clinicians from the DIALOG+ arm of the trial reported many positive experiences with the intervention, including better self-expression and improved efficiency of meetings. Difficulties reported with the intervention were addressed by further refining the DIALOG+ manual and training. Cost-effectiveness analyses found a 72% likelihood that the intervention both improved outcomes and saved costs.

Limitations

The research was conducted solely in urban east London, meaning that the results may not be broadly generalisable to other settings.

Conclusions

(1) Although services might consider adopting DIALOG+ based on the existing evidence, a definitive trial appears warranted; (2) applying DIALOG+ to patient groups with other mental disorders may be considered, and to groups with physical health problems; (3) a more flexible use with variable intervals might help to make the intervention even more acceptable and effective; (4) more process evaluation is required to identify what mechanisms precisely are involved in the improvements seen in the intervention group in the trial; and (5) what appears to make DIALOG+ effective is that it is not a separate treatment and not a technology that is administered by a specialist; rather, it changes and utilises the existing therapeutic relationship between patients and clinicians in CMHTs to initiate positive change, helping the patients to improve their quality of life.

Future research

Future studies should include a definitive trial on DIALOG+ and test the effectiveness of the intervention with other populations, such as people with depression.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN34757603.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Programme Grants for Applied Research programme.

Rehabilitation Interventions to Promote Recovery from Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review

Only one out of seven patients recovers after a first episode of psychosis despite psychiatric care. Rehabilitation interventions have been developed to improve functional outcomes and to promote recovery. We conducted a systematic review of the effectiveness of the main psychiatric rehabilitation interventions following a search of the electronic databases Pubmed, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar using combinations of terms relating to cognitive remediation, psychoeducation, cognitive-behavioral therapies, and schizophrenia. Eighty articles relevant to the topic of interest were found. According to results, cognitive remediation has been found to be effective in reducing the impact of cognitive impairment, social skills in the learning a variety of skills and to a lesser extent in reducing negative symptoms, psychoeducation in improving compliance and reducing relapses, and cognitive therapy in reducing the intensity of or distress related to positive symptoms. All psychosocial rehabilitation interventions should be considered as evidence-based practices for schizophrenia and need to become a major part of the standard treatment of the disease.

Design and protocol for the Focusing on Clozapine Unresponsive Symptoms (FOCUS) trial: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

For around a third of people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, the condition proves to respond poorly to treatment with many typical and atypical antipsychotics. This is commonly referred to as treatment-resistant schizophrenia. Clozapine is the only antipsychotic with convincing efficacy for people whose symptoms are considered treatment-resistant to antipsychotic medication. However, 30-40 % of such conditions will have an insufficient response to the drug. Cognitive behavioural therapy has been shown to be an effective treatment for schizophrenia when delivered in combination with antipsychotic medication, with several meta-analyses showing robust support for this approach. However, the evidence for the effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy for people with a schizophrenia diagnosis whose symptoms are treatment-resistant to antipsychotic medication is limited. There is a clinical and economic need to evaluate treatments to improve outcomes for people with such conditions.

METHODS/DESIGN

A parallel group, prospective randomised, open, blinded evaluation of outcomes design will be used to compare a standardised cognitive behavioural therapy intervention added to treatment as usual versus treatment as usual alone (the comparator group) for individuals with a diagnosis of schizophrenia for whom an adequate trial of clozapine has either not been possible due to tolerability problems or was not associated with a sufficient therapeutic response. The trial will be conducted across five sites in the United Kingdom.

DISCUSSION

The recruitment target of 485 was achieved, with a final recruitment total of 487. This trial is the largest definitive, pragmatic clinical and cost-effectiveness trial of cognitive behavioural therapy for people with schizophrenia whose symptoms have failed to show an adequate response to clozapine treatment. Using a prognostic risk model, baseline information will be used to explore whether there are identifiable subgroups for which the treatment effect is greatest.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN99672552 . Registered 29(th) November 2012.

Disability and recovery in schizophrenia: a systematic review of cognitive behavioral therapy interventions

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia is a disabling disease that impacts all major life areas. There is a growing need for meeting the challenge of disability from a perspective that extends symptomatic reduction. Therefore, this study aimed to systematically review the extent to which traditional and "third wave" cognitive - behavioral (CBT) interventions address the whole scope of disabilities experienced by people with lived experience of schizophrenia using the WHO's International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) as a frame of reference. It also explores if current CBT interventions focus on recovery and what is their impact on disability domains.

METHODS

Medline and PsycINFO databases were searched for studies published in English between January 2009 and December 2015. Abstracts and full papers were screened against pre-defined selection criteria by two reviewers. Methodological quality of included studies was assessed by two independent raters using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality assessment tool for quantitative studies (EPHPP) guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 50 studies were included, 35 studies evaluating traditional CBT interventions and 15 evaluating "third wave" approaches. Overall, traditional CBT interventions addressed more disability domains than "third wave" approaches and mostly focused on mental functions reflecting schizophrenia psychopathology. Seven studies met the inclusion criteria of recovery-oriented interventions. The majority of studies evaluating these interventions had however a high risk of bias, therefore evidence on their effectiveness is inconclusive.

CONCLUSIONS

Traditional CBT interventions address more disability domains than "third wave" therapies, however both approaches focus mostly on mental functions that reflect schizophrenia psychopathology. There are also few interventions that focus on recovery. These results indicate that CBT interventions going beyond symptom reduction are still needed. Recovery-focused CBT interventions seem to be a promising treatment approach as they target disability from a broader perspective including activity and participation domains. Although their effectiveness is inconclusive, they reflect users' views of recovery and trends towards improvement of mood, negative symptoms and functioning are shown.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Group Coping-Oriented Therapy vs Supportive Therapy in Schizophrenia: Results of a 2-Year Follow-up

OBJECTIVE

Over the past 30 years, illness management programs and cognitive-behavioral therapy for psychosis have gained prominence in the treatment of schizophrenia. However, little is known about the long-term benefits of these types of programs when delivered during inpatient treatment following a symptom exacerbation. To evaluate this question, we conducted a randomized controlled trial comparing the long-term effects of a group-based coping-oriented program (COP) that combined the elements of illness management with cognitive behavioral-therapy for psychosis, with an equally intensive supportive therapy (SUP) program.

METHOD

196 inpatients with DSM-IV schizophrenia were randomized to COP or SUP, each lasting 12 sessions provided over 6-8 weeks. Outcome measures were collected in the hospital at baseline and post-assessment, and following discharge into the community 1 and 2 years later. We compared the groups on rehospitalizations, symptoms, psychosocial functioning, and knowledge about psychosis.

RESULTS

Intent-to-treat analyses indicated that patients in COP learned significantly more information about psychosis, and had greater reductions in overall symptoms and depression/anxiety over the treatment and follow-up period than patients in SUP. Patients in both groups improved significantly in other symptoms and psychosocial functioning. There were no differences between the groups in hospitalization rates, which were low.

CONCLUSIONS

People with schizophrenia can benefit from short-term COPs delivered during the inpatient phase, with improvements sustaining for 2 years following discharge from the hospital. More research is needed to evaluate the long-term impact of coping-oriented and similar programs provided during inpatient treatment.

Psychoeducational and Cognitive Behavioral Treatment Programs: Implementation and Evaluation From 1995 to 2015 in Kraepelin's Former Hospital

OBJECTIVE

Programs that view individuals as capable of taking an active role in managing their illness have gained importance in Europe and the United States. This article describes the implementation and evaluation of group psychoeducational and cognitive behavioral treatment programs at the Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig Maximilian University, Munich, Germany, over the past 20 years.

METHODS

Implementing psychoeducational programs was the first step to establish cognitive behavioral psychotherapy and dispel the myth of schizophrenia for patients. Programs are also provided for patients with mood disorders, substance use disorders, or both. These groups include topics such as psychoeducation about the illness, establishing rewarding activities, stress management, cognitive therapy, and relapse prevention.

RESULTS

More than 1000 patients with schizophrenia or mood disorders (380 schizophrenia, 563 major depression, and 110 bipolar) have participated in illness management groups to learn about their illness and its treatment, and to learn skills to manage their illness. Patients have expressed satisfaction with the programs, and research has supported their effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals with severe disorders can benefit from psychoeducational and cognitive treatment programs if the programs are adapted to the level of neuropsychological functioning and compensate for cognitive deficits and emotional overload. These findings suggest that providing information about the illness and coping skills for patients and relatives are important for treatment outcome.

Special Supplement Introduction: The Fourth Kraepelin Symposium-Cognitive Dysfunction in Schizophrenia: Origins and Innovative Treatment

This Special Supplement presents reports from working groups meeting at the Fourth Kraepelin Symposium in Munich, Germany, in September 2014. It covers the origins and therapy of cognitive dysfunction in schizophrenia. Cognitive deficits are core symptoms of schizophrenia being decisive for the long-term prognosis only improved moderately by antipsychotic treatment, however, showing more evidence for cognitive remediation. The authors refer to neurobiological and psychological underpinnings of cognitive deficits and to innovative treatment interventions aimed at improving cognitive dysfunction in order to improve outcome and to support coping with the illness. Therapeutic approaches include aerobic exercise, cognitive training, psychoeducation, cognitive therapy, noninvasive brain stimulation and pharmacotherapy in acute to post-acute patients. The supplement also presents novel diagnostic tools for early recognition, such as biomarkers, as well as cognitive training to prevent worsening of symptoms in individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis. In recent years there has been progress in basic science and outcomes research as well as psychopharmacological and psychological treatment options. Despite of this, treatment of cognitive deficits needs significant improvement and further research is needed.

Cognitive Behaviour Therapy for Psychosis in High Secure Services: An Exploratory Hermeneutic Review of the International Literature

BACKGROUND

Mainstream psychological interventions may need adaptation in High Secure (HS) healthcare contexts to enable better recovery, safeguard the public and offer economic value. One specific psychological intervention, cognitive behavioural therapy for psychosis (CBTp), has an already proven efficacy in aiding recovery in non-forensic populations, yet its impact in HS settings has received considerably less research attention.

AIMS

This exploratory review catalogues CBTp approaches used in HS hospitals and appraises impact through the inclusion of both fugitive literature and peer reviewed research.

METHOD

A pragmatic approach was utilized through an iterative literature search strategy and hermeneutic source analysis of the identified studies.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies were identified from HS contexts from within the UK and internationally. These included group, individual therapy and CBTp linked milieus.

CONCLUSIONS

CBTp is an active component of treatment in HS contexts. Some modes of delivery seem to have greater levels of efficacy with more typical HS patients. The literature indicates key differences between HS and non-HS applied CBTp. Continued application and evaluation of CBTp in HS conditions is warranted.

Mindfulness- and Acceptance-based Interventions for Psychosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background:

Mindfulness- and acceptance-based interventions are increasingly studied as a potential treatment for a variety of mental conditions.

Objective:

To assess the effects of mindfulness- and acceptance-based interventions on psychotic symptoms and hospitalization in patients with psychosis

Methods:

MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO were screened from inception through April 2015. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were analyzed when they assessed psychotic symptoms or hospitalization in patients with psychosis; affect, acceptance, mindfulness, and safety were defined as secondary outcomes.

Results:

Eight RCTs with a total of 434 patients comparing mindfulness-based (4 RCTs) or acceptance-based interventions (4 RCTs) to treatment as usual or attention control were included. Six RCTs had low risk of bias. Moderate evidence was found for short-term effects on total psychotic symptoms, positive symptoms, hospitalization rates, duration of hospitalization, and mindfulness and for long-term effects on total psychotic symptoms and duration of hospitalization. No evidence was found for effects on negative symptoms, affect, or acceptance. No serious adverse events were reported.

Conclusion:

Mindfulness- and acceptance-based interventions can be recommended as an additional treatment for patients with psychosis.

Cognitive behavioural therapy (brief versus standard duration) for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Cognitive behavioural therapy for people with schizophrenia is a psychotherapeutic approach that establishes links between thoughts, emotions and behaviours and challenges dysfunctional thoughts. There is some evidence to suggest that cognitive behavioural therapy for people with psychosis (CBTp) might be an effective treatment for people with schizophrenia. There are however, limitations in its provision due to available resource and training issues. One way to tackle this issue might be to offer a brief version of CBTp.

OBJECTIVES

To review the effects of brief CBTp (6 to 10 regular sessions given in less than 4 months and using a manual) for people with schizophrenia compared with standard CBTp (12 to 20 regular sessions given in 4 to 6 months and using a manual).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Trials Register (August 21, 2013 and August 26, 2015) which is based on regular searches of CINAHL, BIOSIS, AMED, EMBASE, PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and registries of Clinical Trials. There are no language, date, document type, or publication status limitations for inclusion of records in the register. We inspected all references of the selected articles for further relevant trials. We also contacted experts in the field regarding brief CBTp studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials involving adults with schizophrenia or related disorders, comparing brief cognitive behavioural therapy for people with psychosis versus standard CBTp.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened and assessed studies for inclusion using pre-specified inclusion criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

We found only seven studies which used a brief version of CBTp, but no study compared brief CBTp with CBTp of standard duration. No studies could be included.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently there is no literature available to compare brief with standard CBTp for people with schizophrenia. We cannot, therefore, conclude whether brief CBTp is as effective, less effective or even more effective than standard courses of the same therapy. This lack of evidence for brief CBTp has serious implications for research and practice. Well planned, conducted and reported randomised trials are indicated.

Psychological treatments for early psychosis can be beneficial or harmful, depending on the therapeutic alliance: an instrumental variable analysis

BACKGROUND

The quality of the therapeutic alliance (TA) has been invoked to explain the equal effectiveness of different psychotherapies, but prior research is correlational, and does not address the possibility that individuals who form good alliances may have good outcomes without therapy.

METHOD

We evaluated the causal effect of TA using instrumental variable (structural equation) modelling on data from a three-arm, randomized controlled trial of 308 people in an acute first or second episode of a non-affective psychosis. The trial compared cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) over 6 weeks plus routine care (RC) v. supportive counselling (SC) plus RC v. RC alone. We examined the effect of TA, as measured by the client-rated CALPAS, on the primary trial 18-month outcome of symptom severity (PANSS), which was assessed blind to treatment allocation.

RESULTS

Both adjunctive CBT and SC improved 18-month outcomes, compared to RC. We showed that, for both psychological treatments, improving TA improves symptomatic outcome. With a good TA, attending more sessions causes a significantly better outcome on PANSS total score [effect size -2.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.90 to -4.91]. With a poor TA, attending more sessions is detrimental (effect size +7.74, 95% CI +1.03 to +14.45).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first ever demonstration that TA has a causal effect on symptomatic outcome of a psychological treatment, and that poor TA is actively detrimental. These effects may extend to other therapeutic modalities and disorders.

The effectiveness of psychodynamic psychotherapies: An update

This paper provides a comprehensive review of outcome studies and meta-analyses of effectiveness studies of psychodynamic therapy (PDT) for the major categories of mental disorders. Comparisons with inactive controls (waitlist, treatment as usual and placebo) generally but by no means invariably show PDT to be effective for depression, some anxiety disorders, eating disorders and somatic disorders. There is little evidence to support its implementation for post-traumatic stress disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, bulimia nervosa, cocaine dependence or psychosis. The strongest current evidence base supports relatively long-term psychodynamic treatment of some personality disorders, particularly borderline personality disorder. Comparisons with active treatments rarely identify PDT as superior to control interventions and studies are generally not appropriately designed to provide tests of statistical equivalence. Studies that demonstrate inferiority of PDT to alternatives exist, but are small in number and often questionable in design. Reviews of the field appear to be subject to allegiance effects. The present review recommends abandoning the inherently conservative strategy of comparing heterogeneous "families" of therapies for heterogeneous diagnostic groups. Instead, it advocates using the opportunities provided by bioscience and computational psychiatry to creatively explore and assess the value of protocol-directed combinations of specific treatment components to address the key problems of individual patients.

Augmentation with antidepressants in schizophrenia treatment: benefit or risk

We focused on the application of antidepressants in schizophrenia treatment in this review. Augmentation of antidepressants with antipsychotics is a common clinical practice to treat resistant symptoms in schizophrenia, including depressive symptoms, negative symptoms, comorbid obsessive-compulsive symptoms, and other psychotic manifestations. However, recent systematic review of the clinical effects of antidepressants is lacking. In this review, we have selected and summarized current literature on the use of antidepressants in patients with schizophrenia; the patterns of use and effectiveness, as well as risks and drug-drug interactions of this clinical practice are discussed in detail, with particular emphasis on the treatment of depressive symptoms in schizophrenia.

Group CBT for psychosis in acute care: a review of outcome studies

There is evidence that group cognitive behavioural therapy for psychosis (CBTp) is an effective treatment, but much of this research has been conducted with outpatient populations. The aim of this review was to determine the utility of group CBTp for inpatients. We systematically searched Scopus, Web of Science and EBSCO electronic databases to identify relevant research. We reviewed the resulting articles and included those which had been conducted with inpatients, with symptoms of psychosis, using cognitive behaviour therapy, delivered in a group format. Fourteen articles relating to ten studies were identified. Two were randomized controlled trials; two were cohort studies and the rest were pre-/post-intervention studies. There was considerable heterogeneity between the studies and all had methodological limitations. The findings suggest positive trends towards the reduction of distress associated with psychotic symptoms, increased knowledge of symptoms, decreased affective symptoms and reduced readmissions over several years. However, there is currently not enough evidence to draw any strong conclusions regarding the utility of group CBTp for inpatients due to the small number of studies and limitations in quality and generalizability. Therefore, this review indicates the need for further research, particularly large, methodologically rigorous, randomized controlled trials.

What Are the Primary Goals of Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Psychosis? A Theoretical and Empirical Review

Despite a rise in the popularity of cognitive behavior therapy for psychosis (CBTp) over the past 15 years, recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses have concluded that CBTp has only modest effects on psychotic syndrome outcomes and that empirical evidence of its superiority over other psychosocial treatments is poor (Jones, Hacker, Meaden, Cormac, & Irving, 2012; Wykes, Steel, Everitt, & Tarrier, 2008). However, for some time now, some authors prominent in the development of CBTp have argued the primary goals of CBTp not to be global syndrome reduction but the amelioration of emotional distress and behavioral disturbance in relation to individual psychotic symptoms (Birchwood & Trower, 2006). A review of the theoretical and empirical literature related to CBTp reveals broad support for this position. Implications and recommendations for research into the efficacy of CBTp are discussed.