Evaluating integrated MI and CBT for people with psychosis and substance misuse: recruitment, retention and sample characteristics of the MIDAS trial

Psychosocial interventions for stimulant use disorder

BACKGROUND

Stimulant use disorder is a continuously growing medical and social burden without approved medications available for its treatment. Psychosocial interventions could be a valid approach to help people reduce or cease stimulant consumption. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of psychosocial interventions for stimulant use disorder in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, and two trials registers in September 2023. All searches included non-English language literature. We handsearched the references of topic-related systematic reviews and the included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any psychosocial intervention with no intervention, treatment as usual (TAU), or a different intervention in adults with stimulant use disorder.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 64 RCTs (8241 participants). Seventy-three percent of studies included participants with cocaine or crack cocaine use disorder; 3.1% included participants with amphetamine use disorder; 10.9% included participants with methamphetamine use disorder; and 12.5% included participants with any stimulant use disorder. In 18 studies, all participants were in methadone maintenance treatment. In our primary comparison of any psychosocial treatment to no intervention, we included studies which compared a psychosocial intervention plus TAU to TAU alone. In this comparison, 12 studies evaluated cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), 27 contingency management, three motivational interviewing, one study looked at psychodynamic therapy, and one study evaluated CBT plus contingency management. We also compared any psychosocial intervention to TAU. In this comparison, seven studies evaluated CBT, two contingency management, two motivational interviewing, and one evaluated a combination of CBT plus motivational interviewing. Seven studies compared contingency management reinforcement related to abstinence versus contingency management not related to abstinence. Finally, seven studies compared two different psychosocial approaches. We judged 65.6% of the studies to be at low risk of bias for random sequence generation and 19% at low risk for allocation concealment. Blinding of personnel and participants was not possible for the type of intervention, so we judged all the studies to be at high risk of performance bias for subjective outcomes but at low risk for objective outcomes. We judged 22% of the studies to be at low risk of detection bias for subjective outcomes. We judged most of the studies (69%) to be at low risk of attrition bias. When compared to no intervention, we found that psychosocial treatments: reduce the dropout rate (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 0.91; 30 studies, 4078 participants; high-certainty evidence); make little to no difference to point abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.41; 12 studies, 1293 participants; high-certainty evidence); make little to no difference to point abstinence at the longest follow-up (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.62; 9 studies, 1187 participants; high-certainty evidence); probably increase continuous abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.89, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.97; 12 studies, 1770 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); may make little to no difference in continuous abstinence at the longest follow-up (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.46; 4 studies, 295 participants; low-certainty evidence); reduce the frequency of drug intake at the end of treatment (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.35, 95% CI -0.50 to -0.19; 10 studies, 1215 participants; high-certainty evidence); and increase the longest period of abstinence (SMD 0.54, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.68; 17 studies, 2118 participants; high-certainty evidence). When compared to TAU, we found that psychosocial treatments reduce the dropout rate (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.97; 9 studies, 735 participants; high-certainty evidence) and may make little to no difference in point abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.67, 95% CI 0.64 to 4.31; 1 study, 128 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether they make any difference in point abstinence at the longest follow-up (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.99; 2 studies, 124 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Compared to TAU, psychosocial treatments may make little to no difference in continuous abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.53; 1 study, 128 participants; low-certainty evidence); probably make little to no difference in the frequency of drug intake at the end of treatment (SMD -1.17, 95% CI -2.81 to 0.47, 4 studies, 479 participants, moderate-certainty evidence); and may make little to no difference in the longest period of abstinence (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.54 to 0.21; 1 study, 110 participants; low-certainty evidence). None of the studies for this comparison assessed continuous abstinence at the longest follow-up. Only five studies reported harms related to psychosocial interventions; four of them stated that no adverse events occurred.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review's findings indicate that psychosocial treatments can help people with stimulant use disorder by reducing dropout rates. This conclusion is based on high-certainty evidence from comparisons of psychosocial interventions with both no treatment and TAU. This is an important finding because many people with stimulant use disorders leave treatment prematurely. Stimulant use disorders are chronic, lifelong, relapsing mental disorders, which require substantial therapeutic efforts to achieve abstinence. For those who are not yet able to achieve complete abstinence, retention in treatment may help to reduce the risks associated with stimulant use. In addition, psychosocial interventions reduce stimulant use compared to no treatment, but they may make little to no difference to stimulant use when compared to TAU. The most studied and promising psychosocial approach is contingency management. Relatively few studies explored the other approaches, so we cannot rule out the possibility that the results were imprecise due to small sample sizes.

A health promotion intervention to improve lifestyle choices and health outcomes in people with psychosis: a research programme including the IMPaCT RCT

Background

People with psychotic disorders have reduced life expectancy largely because of physical health problems, especially cardiovascular disease, that are complicated by the use of tobacco and cannabis.

Objectives

We set out to (1) chart lifestyle and substance use choices and the emergence of cardiometabolic risk from the earliest presentation with psychosis, (2) develop a pragmatic health promotion intervention integrated within the clinical teams to improve the lifestyle choices and health outcomes of people with psychosis and (3) evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of that health promotion intervention.

Design

We performed a longitudinal cohort study of people presenting with their first episode of psychosis in three mental health trusts and followed up participants for 1 year [work package 1, physical health and substance use measures in first episode of psychosis (PUMP)]. We used an iterative Delphi methodology to develop and refine a modular health promotion intervention, improving physical health and reducing substance use in psychosis (IMPaCT) therapy, which was to be delivered by the patient’s usual care co-ordinator and used motivational interviewing techniques and cognitive–behavioural therapy to improve health choices of people with psychosis (work package 2). We then conducted a multicentre, two-arm, parallel-cluster, randomised controlled trial to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of using the intervention with people with established psychosis (work package 3: IMPaCT randomised controlled trial) in five UK mental health trusts. The work took place between 2008 and 2014.

Participants

All people aged between 16 and 65 years within 6 months of their first presentation with a non-organic psychosis and who were proficient in English were eligible for inclusion in the PUMP study. Participants in the work package 2 training development were staff selected from a range of settings, working with psychosis. Participants in the phase 3 Delphi consensus and manual development comprised three expert groups of (1) therapists/researchers recruited from the local and national community, (2) clinicians and (3) service users, each of whom took part in two iterative review and feedback sessions. For work package 3, IMPaCT randomised controlled trial, care co-ordinators in participating community mental health teams who were permanently employed and had a minimum of four eligible patients (i.e. aged between 18 and 65 years with a diagnosis of a psychotic disorder) on their caseload were eligible to participate. In studies 1 and 3, patient participants were ineligible if they were pregnant or had a major illness that would have had an impact on their metabolic status or if they had a significant learning disability. All participants were included in the study only after giving written confirmed consent.

Main outcome measures

Cardiometabolic risk markers, including rates of obesity and central obesity, and levels of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and lipids, were the main outcomes in work package 1 (PUMP), with descriptive data presented on substance use. Our primary outcome measure for the IMPaCT randomised controlled trial was the physical or mental health component Short Form questionnaire-36 items quality-of-life scores at 12 months.

Results

Obesity rates rose from 18% at first presentation with psychosis to 24% by 1 year, but cardiometabolic risk was not associated with baseline lifestyle and substance use choices. Patterns of increase in the levels of HbA1c over the year following first presentation showed variation by ethnic group. We recruited 104 care co-ordinators, of whom 52 (with 213 patients) were randomised to deliver IMPaCT therapy and 52 (with 193 patients) were randomised to deliver treatment as usual, in keeping with our power calculations. Of these 406 participants with established psychosis, 318 (78%) and 301 (74%) participants, respectively, attended the 12- and 15-month follow-ups. We found no significant effect of IMPaCT therapy compared with treatment as usual on the physical or mental health component Short Form questionnaire-36 items scores at either time point in an intention-to-treat analysis [physical health score (‘d’) –0.17 at 12 months and –0.09 at 15 months; mental health score (‘d’) 0.03 at 12 months and –0.05 at 15 months] or on costs. Nor did we find an effect on other cardiovascular risk indicators, including diabetes, except in the case of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, which showed a trend for greater benefit with IMPaCT therapy than with treatment as usual (treatment effect 0.085, 95% confidence interval 0.007 to 0.16; p = 0.034).

Limitations

Follow-up in work package 1 was challenging, with 127 out of 293 participants attending; however, there was no difference in cardiometabolic measures or demographic factors at baseline between those who attended for follow-up and those who did not. In work package 3, the IMPaCT randomised controlled trial, care co-ordinators struggled to provide additional time to their patients that was devoted to the health promotion intervention on top of their usual clinical care contact with them.

Conclusions

Cardiometabolic risk is prominent even soon after first presentation with psychosis and increases over time. Lifestyle choices and substance use habits at first presentation do not predict those who will be most cardiometabolically compromised 1 year later. Training and supervising care co-ordinators to deliver a health promotion intervention to their own patients on top of routine care is not effective in the NHS for improving quality of life or reducing cardiometabolic risk.

Future work

Further work is needed to develop and evaluate effective, cost-effective and affordable ways of preventing the emergence of and reversing existing cardiometabolic risk indicators in people with psychosis.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN58667926.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 8, No. 1. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

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.

Psychological treatment for methamphetamine use and associated psychiatric symptom outcomes: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Regular methamphetamine use is associated with increased rates of psychiatric symptoms. Although there has been a substantial body of research reporting on the effectiveness of psychological treatments for reducing methamphetamine use, there is a paucity of research examining the effects of these treatments on co-occurring psychiatric symptoms. We addressed this gap by undertaking a systematic review of the evidence of the effectiveness of psychological treatments for methamphetamine use on psychiatric symptom outcomes in randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

A narrative synthesis of studies was conducted following the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement to inform methodology. Eight electronic peer-reviewed databases were searched. Ten eligible studies were assessed.

RESULTS

Most studies found an overall reduction in levels of methamphetamine use and psychiatric symptoms among samples as a whole. Although brief interventions were effective, there is evidence that more intensive interventions have greater impact on methamphetamine use and/or psychiatric symptomatology. Intervention attendance was variable.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence suggests that a variety of psychological treatments are effective in reducing levels of methamphetamine use and improving psychiatric symptoms. Future research should consider how psychological treatments could maximize outcomes in the co-occurring domains of methamphetamine use and psychiatric symptoms, with increasing treatment attendance as a focus. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42016043657.

Cognitive-behavioural treatment for amphetamine-type stimulants (ATS)-use disorders

Background

Amphetamine-type stimulants (ATS) refer to a group of synthetic stimulants including amphetamine, methamphetamine, 3,4-methylenedioxy-methamphetamine (MDMA) and related substances. ATS are highly addictive and prolonged use may result in a series of mental and physical symptoms including anxiety, confusion, insomnia, mood disturbances, cognitive impairments, paranoia, hallucinations and delusion.Currently there is no widely accepted treatment for ATS-use disorder. However, cognitive-behavioural treatment (CBT) is the first-choice treatment. The effectiveness of CBT for other substance-use disorders (e.g. alcohol-, opioid- and cocaine-use disorders) has been well documented and as such this basic treatment approach has been applied to the ATS-use disorder.

Objectives

To investigate the efficacy of cognitive-behavioural treatment for people with ATS-use disorder for reducing ATS use compared to other types of psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy, 12-step facilitation, no intervention or treatment as usual.

Search methods

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCT) and quasi-RCTs comparing CBT for ATS-use disorders with other types of psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy, 12 step facilitation or no intervention. We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase and five other databases up to July 2018. In addition, we examined reference lists of eligible studies and other systematic reviews. We contacted experts in the field.

Selection criteria

Eligibility criteria consisted of RCTs and quasi-RCTs comparing CBT versus other types of interventions with adult ATS users (aged 18 years or older) diagnosed by any explicit diagnostic system. Primary outcomes included abstinence rate and other indicators of drug-using behaviours.

Data collection and analysis

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

Main results

Only two studies met the eligibility criteria. Both studies were at low risk of selection bias and reporting bias. In one study, almost half of participants in the intervention group dropped out and this study was at high risk of attrition bias. The studies compared a single session of brief CBT or a web-based CBT to a waiting-list control (total sample size across studies of 129). Results were mixed across the studies. For the single-session brief CBT study, two out of five measures of drug use produced significant results, percentage of abstinent days in 90 days (odds ratio (OR) 0.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 to 2.11) and dependence symptoms (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.59, 95% CI-1.16 to-0.02). Little confidence could be placed in the results from this study give the small sample size (25 participants per group) and corresponding large CIs around the observed effects. For the web-based CBT, there was no significant difference across different outcomes. Neither study reported adverse effects. The meta-analytic mean across these two trials for drug use was not significant (SMD -0.28, 95% CI-0.69 to 0.14). In summary, overall quality of evidence was low and there was insufficient evidence to conclude that CBT is effective, or ineffective, at treating ATS use.

Authors' conclusions

Currently, there is not enough evidence to establish the efficacy of CBT for ATS-use disorders because of a paucity of high-quality research in this area.

Facilitators and Barriers to Participating in a Randomized Controlled Trial of a Psychological Therapy for Substance Use

Research involving substance users with psychosis has high refusal and attrition rates. Understanding participants' experiences of research participation is therefore important. Twenty-two cannabis users with schizophrenia spectrum disorders were recruited. They were involved in a randomized controlled trial exploring the effectiveness of motivational interviewing plus cognitive behavioral therapy. Semistructured interviews were conducted, and their responses were analyzed using thematic analysis. Thematic analysis identified facilitators such as therapeutic benefit, knowledge about medical conditions, awareness of own drug habits, helping others, confidentiality, rapport with researchers, desiring social contact, and views of significant others. Barriers identified were cognitive challenge, amount of assessments, duration, and discussions about the past. Based on these insights, we recommend informing participants about clinical equipoise, confidentiality, and demands of the study; minimizing demands on participants; acknowledging participants' efforts; involving potential participants' significant others during recruitment; advertising research as an opportunity to help; and training researchers in building rapport.

Cognitive-behavioural treatment for amphetamine-type stimulants (ATS)-use disorders

BACKGROUND

Amphetamine-type stimulants (ATS) refer to a group of synthetic stimulants including amphetamine, methamphetamine, 3,4-methylenedioxy-methamphetamine (MDMA) and related substances. ATS are highly addictive and prolonged use may result in a series of mental and physical symptoms including anxiety, confusion, insomnia, mood disturbances, cognitive impairments, paranoia, hallucinations and delusion.Currently there is no widely accepted treatment for ATS-use disorder. However, cognitive-behavioural treatment (CBT) is the first-choice treatment. The effectiveness of CBT for other substance-use disorders (e.g. alcohol-, opioid- and cocaine-use disorders) has been well documented and as such this basic treatment approach has been applied to the ATS-use disorder.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the efficacy of cognitive-behavioural treatment for people with ATS-use disorder for reducing ATS use compared to other types of psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy, 12-step facilitation, no intervention or treatment as usual.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCT) and quasi-RCTs comparing CBT for ATS-use disorders with other types of psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy, 12 step facilitation or no intervention. We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase and five other databases up to July 2018. In addition, we examined reference lists of eligible studies and other systematic reviews. We contacted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eligibility criteria consisted of RCTs and quasi-RCTs comparing CBT versus other types of interventions with adult ATS users (aged 18 years or older) diagnosed by any explicit diagnostic system. Primary outcomes included abstinence rate and other indicators of drug-using behaviours.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

Only two studies met the eligibility criteria. Both studies were at low risk of selection bias and reporting bias. In one study, almost half of participants in the intervention group dropped out and this study was at high risk of attrition bias. The studies compared a single session of brief CBT or a web-based CBT to a waiting-list control (total sample size across studies of 129). Results were mixed across the studies. For the single-session brief CBT study, two out of five measures of drug use produced significant results, percentage of abstinent days in 90 days (odds ratio (OR) 0.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 to 2.11) and dependence symptoms (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.59, 95% CI -1.16 to -0.02). Little confidence could be placed in the results from this study give the small sample size (25 participants per group) and corresponding large CIs around the observed effects. For the web-based CBT, there was no significant difference across different outcomes. Neither study reported adverse effects. The meta-analytic mean across these two trials for drug use was not significant (SMD -0.28, 95% CI -0.69 to 0.14). In summary, overall quality of evidence was low and there was insufficient evidence to conclude that CBT is effective, or ineffective, at treating ATS use.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently, there is not enough evidence to establish the efficacy of CBT for ATS-use disorders because of a paucity of high-quality research in this area.

Cognitive behavioural therapy plus standard care versus standard care for people with schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is a psychosocial treatment that aims to re-mediate distressing emotional experiences or dysfunctional behaviour by changing the way in which a person interprets and evaluates the experience or cognates on its consequence and meaning. This approach helps to link the person's feelings and patterns of thinking which underpin distress. 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. This review is also part of a family of Cochrane CBT reviews for people with schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of cognitive behavioural therapy added to standard care compared with standard care alone for people with schizophrenia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Trials Register (up to March 6, 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 all randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) involving people diagnosed with schizophrenia or related disorders, which compared adding CBT to standard care with standard care given alone. Outcomes of interest included relapse, rehospitalisation, mental state, adverse events, social functioning, quality of life, and satisfaction with treatment.We included studies fulfilling the predefined inclusion criteria and reporting useable data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We complied with the Cochrane recommended standard of conduct for data screening and collection. Where possible, we calculated relative risk (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) for binary data and mean difference (MD) and its 95% confidence interval for continuous data. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and created a 'Summary of findings' table using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

This review now includes 60 trials with 5,992 participants, all comparing CBT added to standard care with standard care alone. Results for the main outcomes of interest (all long term) showed no clear difference between CBT and standard care for relapse (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.00; participants = 1538; studies = 13, low-quality evidence). Two trials reported global state improvement. More participants in the CBT groups showed clinically important improvement in global state (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.84; participants = 82; studies = 2 , very low-quality evidence). Five trials reported mental state improvement. No differences in mental state improvement were observed (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.02; participants = 501; studies = 5, very low-quality evidence). In terms of safety, adding CBT to standard care may reduce the risk of having an adverse event (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.72; participants = 146; studies = 2, very low-quality evidence) but appears to have no effect on long-term social functioning (MD 0.56, 95% CI -2.64 to 3.76; participants = 295; studies = 2, very low-quality evidence, nor on long-term quality of life (MD -3.60, 95% CI -11.32 to 4.12; participants = 71; study = 1, very low-quality evidence). It also has no effect on long-term satisfaction with treatment (measured as 'leaving the study early') (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.12; participants = 1945; studies = 19, moderate-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Relative to standard care alone, adding CBT to standard care appears to have no effect on long-term risk of relapse. A very small proportion of the available evidence indicated CBT plus standard care may improve long term global state and may reduce the risk of adverse events. Whether adding CBT to standard care leads to clinically important improvement in patients' long-term mental state, quality of life, and social function remains unclear. Satisfaction with care (measured as number of people leaving the study early) was no higher for participants receiving CBT compared to participants receiving standard care. It should be noted that although much research has been carried out in this area, the quality of evidence available is poor - mostly low or very low quality and we still cannot make firm conclusions until more high quality data are available.

The feasibility of following up prisoners, with mental health problems, after release: a pilot trial employing an innovative system, for engagement and retention in research, with a harder-to-engage population

Background

Following up released prisoners is demanding, particularly for those prisoners with mental health problems, for whom stigma and chaotic lifestyles are problematic. Measurement of mental health outcomes after release is challenging. To evaluate mental healthcare for offender populations, using high-quality randomised controlled trials, evidenced-based methods must be developed to engage them while in custody, to locate and re-interview them after release, and to collect potentially stigmatising mental health outcomes data.

Methods

We developed an initial theoretical model and operational procedures for collecting baseline and follow-up data informed by a literature search, focus groups, and case studies. Male prisoners from five prisons in two sites were invited to participate. The inclusion criteria included individuals who were above threshold on nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire, seven-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder, or post-traumatic stress disorder scales, or who had reported mental health problems in the past 2 years or had been assessed with a likely personality disorder. Potential participants were interviewed to generate baseline data and were re-contacted before their release. We then contacted them for a follow-up interview, which included repeating the earlier data collection measures 2–8 weeks after release. A qualitative formative process evaluation produced and refined a model procedure for the recruitment and retention of male prison leavers in trials, identified the mechanisms which promoted engagement and retention, and mapped these against a theoretical behaviour change model.

Results

We developed a flexible procedure which was successful in recruiting male prison leavers to a pilot trial: 185/243 (76%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 70–81%) of those approached agreed to participate. We also retained 63% (95% CI 54–71%) of those eligible to participate in a follow-up interview 2–8 weeks after release. Mental health outcomes data was collected at both these time points.

Conclusions

It is possible to design acceptable procedures to achieve sustained engagement critical for delivering and evaluating interventions in prison and in the community and to collect mental health outcomes data. These procedures may reduce attrition bias in future randomised controlled trials of mental health interventions for prison leavers. This procedure has been replicated and successfully delivered in a subsequent pilot trial and a definitive randomised controlled trial.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-2911-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Reducing relapse and suicide in bipolar disorder: practical clinical approaches to identifying risk, reducing harm and engaging service users in planning and delivery of care – the PARADES (Psychoeducation, Anxiety, Relapse, Advance Directive Evaluation and Suicidality) programme

Background

Bipolar disorder (BD) costs £5.2B annually, largely as a result of incomplete recovery after inadequate treatment.

Objectives

A programme of linked studies to reduce relapse and suicide in BD.

Design

There were five workstreams (WSs): a pragmatic randomised controlled trial (RCT) of group psychoeducation (PEd) versus group peer support (PS) in the maintenance of BD (WS1); development and feasibility RCTs of integrated psychological therapy for anxiety in bipolar disorder (AIBD) and integrated for problematic alcohol use in BD (WS2 and WS3); survey and qualitative investigations of suicide and self-harm in BD (WS4); and survey and qualitative investigation of service users’ (SUs) and psychiatrists’ experience of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), with reference to advance planning (WS5).

Setting

Participants were from England; recruitment into RCTs was limited to certain sites [East Midlands and North West (WS1); North West (WS2 and WS3)].

Participants

Aged ≥ 18 years. In WS1–3, participants had their diagnosis of BD confirmed by the Structural Clinical Interview for theDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.

Interventions

In WS1, group PEd/PS; in WS3 and WS4, individual psychological therapy for comorbid anxiety and alcohol use, respectively.

Main outcome measures

In WS1, time to relapse of bipolar episode; in WS2 and WS3, feasibility and acceptability of interventions; in WS4, prevalence and determinants of suicide and self-harm; and in WS5, professional training and support of advance planning in MCA, and SU awareness and implementation.

Results

Group PEd and PS could be routinely delivered in the NHS. The estimated median time to first bipolar relapse was 67.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) 37.3 to 90.9] weeks in PEd, compared with 48.0 (95% CI 30.6 to 65.9) weeks in PS. The adjusted hazard ratio was 0.83 (95% CI 0.62 to 1.11; likelihood ratio testp = 0.217). The interaction between the number of previous bipolar episodes (1–7 and 8–19, relative to 20+) and treatment arm was significant (χ2 = 6.80, degrees of freedom = 2;p = 0.034): PEd with one to seven episodes showed the greatest delay in time to episode. A primary economic analysis indicates that PEd is not cost-effective compared with PS. A sensitivity analysis suggests potential cost-effectiveness if decision-makers accept a cost of £37,500 per quality-adjusted life-year. AIBD and motivational interviewing (MI) cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) trials were feasible and acceptable in achieving recruitment and retention targets (AIBD:n = 72, 72% retention to follow-up; MI-CBT:n = 44, 75% retention) and in-depth qualitative interviews. There were no significant differences in clinical outcomes for either trial overall. The factors associated with risk of suicide and self-harm (longer duration of illness, large number of periods of inpatient care, and problems establishing diagnosis) could inform improved clinical care and specific interventions. Qualitative interviews suggested that suicide risk had been underestimated, that care needs to be more collaborative and that people need fast access to good-quality care. Despite SUs supporting advance planning and psychiatrists being trained in MCA, the use of MCA planning provisions was low, with confusion over informal and legally binding plans.

Limitations

Inferences for routine clinical practice from WS1 were limited by the absence of a ‘treatment as usual’ group.

Conclusion

The programme has contributed significantly to understanding how to improve outcomes in BD. Group PEd is being implemented in the NHS influenced by SU support.

Future work

Future work is needed to evaluate optimal approaches to psychological treatment of comorbidity in BD. In addition, work in improved risk detection in relation to suicide and self-harm in clinical services and improved training in MCA are indicated.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN62761948, ISRCTN84288072 and ISRCTN14774583.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full inProgramme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 6, No. 6. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Early intervention in psychosis: clinical aspects of treatment

Engaging patients in first-episode psychosis services is critical in maximising the effect of early intervention and establishing a framework for longer-term treatment. Biopsychosocial assessments determine a working diagnosis and inform evidence-based treatment. Atypical antipsychotics should be used at doses that maximise therapeutic benefit and adherence while minimising side-effects. Patients are helped to construct a narrative of their illness, including a shared understanding of the contribution of biological and environmental risks, and early warning signs. Common comorbid conditions, including depression, suicidal ideation, substance misuse and anxiety, should be addressed. Management of comorbid borderline and antisocial personality disorders is difficult; their nexus with psychosis is discussed. Cognitive–behavioural therapy is a mainstay of treatment, with specific interventions developed for problems typical in first-episode presentations. Core psychosocial interventions include psychoeducation, vocational and educational support, family interventions and multimodal group programmes.

Randomised control trial of the effectiveness of an integrated psychosocial health promotion intervention aimed at improving health and reducing substance use in established psychosis (IMPaCT)

BACKGROUND

People with psychosis have a reduced life expectancy of 10-20 years, largely due to cardiovascular disease. This trial aimed to determine the effectiveness of a modular health promotion intervention (IMPaCT Therapy) in improving health and reducing cardiovascular risk in psychosis.

METHODS

A multicentre, two arm, parallel cluster RCT was conducted across five UK mental health NHS trusts. Community care coordinators (CC) were randomly assigned to training and supervision in delivering IMPaCT Therapy or treatment as usual (TAU) to current patients with psychosis (cluster). The primary outcome was the physical and mental health subscales of the Short form-36 (SF-36) questionnaire.

RESULTS

Of 104 care coordinators recruited, 52 (with 213 patients) were randomised to deliver IMPaCT therapy and 52 (with 193 patients) randomised to TAU. Of 406 patients, 318 (78%) and 301 (74%) attended 12- and 15-month follow-up respectively. IMPaCT therapy showed no significant effect on the physical or mental health component SF-36 scores versus TAU at 12 or 15 months. No effect was observed for cardiovascular risk indicators, except for HDL cholesterol, which improved more with IMPACT therapy than TAU (Treatment effect (95% CI); 0.085 (0.007 to 0.16); p = 0.034). The 22% of patients who received >180 min of IMPACT Therapy in addition to usual care achieved a greater reduction in waist circumference than did controls, which was clinically significant.

CONCLUSION

Training and supervising community care coordinators to use IMPaCT therapy in patients with psychosis is insufficient to significantly improve physical or mental health quality of life. The search for effective, pragmatic interventions deliverable in health care services continues.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was retrospectively registered with ISRCTN registry on 23/4/2010 at ISRCTN58667926 ; recruitment started on 01/03/2010 with first randomization on 09.08.2010 ISRCTN58667926 .

Attrition in trials evaluating complex interventions for schizophrenia: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Essential criteria for the methodological quality and validity of randomized controlled trials are the drop-out rates from both the experimental intervention and the study as a whole. This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed these drop-out rates in non-pharmacological schizophrenia trials. A systematic literature search was used to identify relevant trials with ≥100 sample size and to extract the drop-out data. The rates of drop-out from the experimental intervention and study were calculated with meta-analysis of proportions. Meta-regression was applied to explore the association between the study and sample characteristics and the drop-out rates. 43 RCTs were found, with drop-out from intervention ranging from 0% to 63% and study drop-out ranging from 4% to 71%. Meta-analyses of proportions showed an overall drop-out rate of 14% (95% CI: 13-15%) at the experimental intervention level and 20% (95% CI: 17-24%) at the study level. Meta-regression showed that the active intervention drop-out rates were predicted by the number of intervention sessions. In non-pharmacological schizophrenia trials, drop-out rates of less than 20% can be achieved for both the study and the experimental intervention. A high heterogeneity of drop-out rates across studies shows that even lower rates are achievable.

Psychosocial interventions for psychostimulant misuse

BACKGROUND

Psychostimulant misuse is a continuously growing medical and social burden. There is no evidence proving the efficacy of pharmacotherapy. Psychosocial interventions could be a valid approach to help patients in reducing or ceasing drug consumption.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of psychosocial interventions for psychostimulant misuse in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialised Register (via CRSLive); Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science and PsycINFO, from inception to November 2015. We also searched for ongoing and unpublished studies via ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (apps.who.int/trialsearch/).All searches included non-English language literature. We handsearched references of topic-related systematic reviews and the included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing any psychosocial intervention with no intervention, treatment as usual (TAU) or a different intervention in adults with psychostimulant misuse or dependence.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 52 trials (6923 participants).The psychosocial interventions considered in the studies were: cognitive behavioural therapy (19 studies), contingency management (25 studies), motivational interviewing (5 studies), interpersonal therapy (3 studies), psychodynamic therapy (1 study), 12-step facilitation (4 studies).We judged most of the studies to be at unclear risk of selection bias; blinding of personnel and participants was not possible for the type of intervention, so all the studies were at high risk of performance bias with regard to subjective outcomes; the majority of studies did not specify whether the outcome assessors were blind. We did not consider it likely that the objective outcomes were influenced by lack of blinding.The comparisons made were: any psychosocial intervention versus no intervention (32 studies), any psychosocial intervention versus TAU (6 studies), and one psychosocial intervention versus an alternative psychosocial intervention (13 studies). Five of included studies did not provide any useful data for inclusion in statistical synthesis.We found that, when compared to no intervention, any psychosocial treatment: reduced the dropout rate (risk ratio (RR): 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to -0.91, 24 studies, 3393 participants, moderate quality evidence); increased continuous abstinence at the end of treatment (RR: 2.14, 95% CI 1.27 to -3.59, 8 studies, 1241 participants, low quality evidence); did not significantly increase continuous abstinence at the longest follow-up (RR: 2.12, 95% CI 0.77 to -5.86, 4 studies, 324 participants, low quality evidence); significantly increased the longest period of abstinence: (standardised mean difference (SMD): 0.48, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.63, 10 studies, 1354 participants, high quality evidence). However, it should be noted that the in the vast majority of the studies in this comparison the specific psychosocial treatment assessed in the experimental arm was given in add on to treatment as usual or to another specific psychosocial or pharmacological treatment which was received by both groups. So, many of the control groups in this comparison were not really untreated. Receiving some amount of treatment is not the same as not receiving any intervention, so we could argue that the overall effect of the experimental psychosocial treatment could be smaller if given in add on to TAU or to another intervention than if given to participants not receiving any intervention; this could translate to a smaller magnitude of the effect of the psychosocial intervention when it is given in add on.When compared to TAU, any psychosocial treatment reduced dropout rate (RR: 0.72, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.89, 6 studies, 516 participants, moderate quality evidence), did not increase continuous abstinence at the end of treatment (RR: 1.27, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.72, 2 studies, 224 participants, low quality evidence), did not increase longest period of abstinence (MD -3.15 days, 95% CI -10.35 to 4.05, 1 study, 110 participants, low quality evidence). No studies in this comparison assessed the outcome of continuous abstinence at longest follow-up.There were few studies comparing two or more psychosocial interventions, with small sample sizes and considerable heterogeneity in terms of the types of interventions assessed. None reported significant results.None of the studies reported harms related to psychosocial interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The addition of any psychosocial treatment to treatment as usual (usually characterised by group counselling or case management) probably reduces the dropout rate and increases the longest period of abstinence. It may increase the number of people achieving continuous abstinence at the end of treatment, although this might not be maintained at longest follow-up. The most studied and the most promising psychosocial approach to be added to treatment as usual is probably contingency management. However, the other approaches were only analysed in a few small studies, so we cannot rule out the possibility that the results were not significant because of imprecision. When compared to TAU, any psychosocial treatment may improve adherence, but it may not improve abstinence at the end of treatment or the longest period of abstinence.The majority of the studies took place in the United States, and this could limit the generalisability of the findings, because the effects of psychosocial treatments could be strongly influenced by the social context and ethnicity. The results of our review do not answer the most relevant clinical question, demonstrating which is the most effective type of psychosocial approach.Further studies should directly compare contingency management with the other psychosocial approaches.

The HELPER programme: HEalthy Living and Prevention of Early Relapse – three exploratory randomised controlled trials of phase-specific interventions in first-episode psychosis

Background

Schizophrenia represents a substantial cost to the NHS and society because it is common (lifetime prevalence around 0.5–1%); it begins in adolescence or early adulthood and often causes lifelong impairment. The first 3 years are a ‘critical period’ in which the course of the illness is determined. Hence under the NHS Plan, specialist early intervention in psychosis services were established to care for people who develop psychosis between the ages of 14 and 35 years for the first 3 years of their illness. However, there has been a lack of evidence-based treatments specifically designed for the early years. This is important because emerging evidence has shown that in the critical period it is vital to avoid relapse and prevent deterioration in physical health, as both can drastically reduce the chances of a full recovery.

Objectives

To develop and evaluate three phase-specific interventions to prevent relapse and/or deterioration in physical health in people with first-episode psychosis. The interventions were (1) cognitive remediation (CR) to improve meta-cognition and insight and enhance engagement in cognitive therapy [evaluated in the IMproving PArticipation in Cognitive Therapy (IMPACT) trial]; (2) a healthy-living intervention to control weight in people taking antipsychotic medication after a first episode of psychosis [evaluated in the INTERvention to Encourage ACTivity, Improve Diet, and Reduce Weight Gain (InterACT trial)]; and (3) integrated motivational interviewing and cognitive–behavioural therapy (MiCBT) to reduce cannabis use [evaluated in the Rethinking Choices After Psychosis (ReCAP) trial]. The trials were conducted to explore the case for larger definitive trials with relapse as a primary outcome measure. However, as small trials do not have sufficient power to detect significant reductions in relapse, each was focused on a relevant primary outcome for which there was sufficient power to detect a significant difference. In all three trials relapse was a secondary outcome in the hope of detecting trends towards lower relapse rates in the presence of effective interventions or a general trend across all three studies towards lower relapse rates.

Design

Three exploratory randomised controlled trials (RCTs) accompanied by qualitative work employing grounded theory and framework analysis to inform the interventions and determine acceptability (InterACT and ReCAP trials).

Setting

Five early-intervention services in the north-west of England.

Participants

Early-intervention service users aged 16–35 years who had recently experienced a first episode of psychosis. Participants in the IMPACT trial were drawn from a waiting list of people referred for routine CBT; those in the InterACT trial were required to have a body mass index (BMI) of ≥ 25 kg/m2(or ≥ 24 kg/m2for service users from the South Asian community); and those in the ReCAP trial metDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders– Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) criteria for cannabis abuse or dependence.

Interventions

The IMPACT trial involved 13 sessions of CR over 12 weeks; the InterACT trial involved eight face-to-face sessions plus optional group activities over 12 months; and the ReCAP trial involved MiCBT in brief (12 sessions over 4.5 months) and long (24 sessions over 9 months) forms.

Main outcome measures

The primary outcome in the IMPACT trial was psychotic symptoms assessed by the Psychotic Symptom Rating Scales (PSYRATS). BMI was the primary outcome in the InterACT trial and cannabis use (measured by timeline follow-back) was the primary outcome in the ReCAP trial. Relapse was a secondary outcome across all three trials.

Results

In the IMPACT trial there was no beneficial effect of CR on psychotic symptoms; however, the amount of CBT required was significantly less after CR. In the InterACT trial a small reduction in BMI in the intervention group was not statistically significant. For participants taking olanzapine or clozapine the effect size was larger although not significant. Outcome data from the ReCAP trial are not yet available. Retention in all three trials was good, indicating that the interventions were acceptable.

Conclusions

Early-intervention services provided a good setting to conduct trials. The IMPACT trial found that CR delivered by relatively unskilled workers improved the efficiency of subsequent CBT. Across the three trials there was little evidence that any intervention reduced relapse.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN17160673 (IMPACT); Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN22581937 (InterACT); Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN88275061 (ReCAP).

Funding

This project was funded by the NIHR Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full inProgramme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 3, No. 2. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Cognitive behavioral therapy: a meta-analysis of race and substance use outcomes

Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is an effective intervention for reducing substance use. However, because CBT trials have included predominantly White samples caution must be used when generalizing these effects to Blacks and Hispanics. This meta-analysis compared the impact of CBT in reducing substance use between studies with a predominantly non-Hispanic White sample (hereafter NHW studies) and studies with a predominantly Black and/or Hispanic sample (hereafter BH studies). From 322 manuscripts identified in the literature, 16 met criteria for inclusion. Effect sizes between CBT and comparison group at posttest had similar effects on substance abuse across NHW and BH studies. However, when comparing pre-posttest effect sizes from groups receiving CBT between NHW and BH studies, CBT's impact was significantly stronger in NHW studies. T-test comparisons indicated reduced retention/engagement in BH studies, albeit failing to reach statistical significance. Results highlight the need for further research testing CBT's impact on substance use among Blacks and Hispanics.

World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) Guidelines for Biological Treatment of Schizophrenia. Part 3: Update 2015 Management of special circumstances: Depression, Suicidality, substance use disorders and pregnancy and lactation

These updated guidelines are based on the first edition of the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) guidelines for biological treatment of schizophrenia published in the years 2005 and 2006. For this 2015 revision, all available publications pertaining to the biological treatment of schizophrenia were reviewed systematically to allow for an evidence-based update. These guidelines provide evidence-based practice recommendations which are clinically and scientifically relevant. They are intended to be used by all physicians diagnosing and treating patients with schizophrenia. Based on the first version of these guidelines a systematic review, as well as a data extraction from national guidelines have been performed for this update. The identified literature was evaluated with respect to the strength of evidence for its efficacy and subsequently categorised into six levels of evidence (A-F) and five levels of recommendation (1-5). This third part of the updated guidelines covers the management of the following specific treatment circumstances: comorbid depression, suicidality, various comorbid substance use disorders (legal and illegal drugs), and pregnancy and lactation. These guidelines are primarily concerned with the biological treatment (including antipsychotic medication and other pharmacological treatment options) of patients with schizophrenia.

A comparison of treatment adherence in individuals with a first episode of psychosis and inpatients with psychosis

In predicting treatment compliance in individuals with severe mental illness, research has focused on variables such as substance abuse, personality, history of child abuse, and symptomatology, although these relationships have not been investigated in great detail in individuals at the onset of mental illness. To better understand these correlates of treatment compliance, two samples were examined: a sample of 117 individuals presenting with a first episode of psychosis and a more chronic forensic sample of 65 participants recruited from a psychiatric hospital. These samples were investigated for service engagement in terms of violence history, substance abuse, symptom severity, psychopathic traits and history of childhood abuse. Linear regressions performed for the first episode sample revealed that childhood physical abuse was the strongest predictor of poor service engagement, followed by problems with alcohol, a history of physical violence, any history of violence and higher psychopathic traits. Linear regression revealed for the forensic group that a lower level of service engagement was most strongly predicted by a history of childhood abuse and a higher score on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS). Results are presented in light of the existing literature and clinical implications are discussed.

Feasibility of a supported self-management intervention for relatives of people with recent-onset psychosis: REACT study

BACKGROUND

Relatives of people with psychosis experience high levels of distress and require support. Family interventions have been shown to be effective in improving outcomes but are difficult to access and not suitable for all relatives.

AIMS

To assess the feasibility and effectiveness of a supported self-management package for relatives of people with recent-onset psychosis.

METHOD

A randomised controlled trial (n = 103) comparing treatment as usual (TAU) in early intervention services with TAU plus the Relatives' Education And Coping Toolkit (REACT) intervention (trial identifier: ISRCTN69299093).

RESULTS

Compared with TAU only, those receiving the additional REACT intervention showed reduced distress and increased perceived support and perceived ability to cope at 6-month follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The toolkit is a feasible and potentially effective intervention to improve outcomes for relatives. A larger trial is needed to reliably assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of REACT, and its impact on longer-term outcomes.

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

For this update (2013), the Trials Search Co-ordinator of the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group (CSG) searched the CSG Trials Register (July 2012), which is based on regular searches of major medical and scientific databases. The principal authors conducted two further searches (8 October 2012 and 15 January 2013) of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE and PsycINFO. A separate search for trials of contingency management was completed as this was an additional intervention category for this update.

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

We independently selected studies, extracted data and appraised study quality. For binary outcomes, we calculated standard estimates of relative risk (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous outcomes, we calculated the mean difference (MD) between groups. For all meta-analyses 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

We included 32 trials with a total of 3165 participants. Evaluation of long-term integrated care included four RCTs (n = 735). We found no significant differences on loss to treatment (n = 603, 3 RCTs, RR 1.09 CI 0.82 to 1.45, low quality of evidence), death by 3 years (n = 421, 2 RCTs, RR 1.18 CI 0.39 to 3.57, low quality of evidence), alcohol use (not in remission at 36 months) (n = 143, 1 RCT, RR 1.15 CI 0.84 to 1.56,low quality of evidence), substance use (n = 85, 1 RCT, RR 0.89 CI 0.63 to 1.25, low quality of evidence), global assessment of functioning (n = 171, 1 RCT, MD 0.7 CI 2.07 to 3.47, low quality of evidence), or general life satisfaction (n = 372, 2 RCTs, MD 0.02 higher CI 0.28 to 0.32, moderate quality of evidence).For evaluation of non-integrated intensive case management with usual treatment (4 RCTs, n = 163) we found no statistically significant difference for loss to treatment at 12 months (n = 134, 3 RCTs, RR 1.21 CI 0.73 to 1.99, very low quality of evidence).Motivational interviewing plus cognitive behavioural therapy compared to usual treatment (7 RCTs, total n = 878) did not reveal any advantage for retaining participants at 12 months (n = 327, 1 RCT, RR 0.99 CI 0.62 to 1.59, low quality of evidence) or for death (n = 493, 3 RCTs, RR 0.72 CI 0.22 to 2.41, low quality of evidence), and no benefit for reducing substance use (n = 119, 1 RCT, MD 0.19 CI -0.22 to 0.6, low quality of evidence), relapse (n = 36, 1 RCT, RR 0.5 CI 0.24 to 1.04, very low quality of evidence) or global functioning (n = 445, 4 RCTs, MD 1.24 CI 1.86 to 4.34, very low quality of evidence).Cognitive behavioural therapy alone compared with usual treatment (2 RCTs, n = 152) showed no significant difference for losses from treatment at 3 months (n = 152, 2 RCTs, RR 1.12 CI 0.44 to 2.86, low quality of evidence). No benefits were observed on measures of lessening cannabis use at 6 months (n = 47, 1 RCT, RR 1.30 CI 0.79 to 2.15, very low quality of evidence) or mental state (n = 105, 1 RCT, Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale MD 0.52 CI -0.78 to 1.82, low quality of evidence).We found no advantage for motivational interviewing alone compared with usual treatment (8 RCTs, n = 509) in reducing losses to treatment at 6 months (n = 62, 1 RCT, RR 1.71 CI 0.63 to 4.64, very low quality of evidence), although significantly more participants in the motivational interviewing group reported for their first aftercare appointment (n = 93, 1 RCT, RR 0.69 CI 0.53 to 0.9). Some differences, favouring treatment, were observed in abstaining from alcohol (n = 28, 1 RCT, RR 0.36 CI 0.17 to 0.75, very low quality of evidence) but not other substances (n = 89, 1 RCT, RR -0.07 CI -0.56 to 0.42, very low quality of evidence), and no differences were observed in mental state (n = 30, 1 RCT, MD 0.19 CI -0.59 to 0.21, very low quality of evidence).We found no significant differences for skills training in the numbers lost to treatment by 12 months (n = 94, 2 RCTs, RR 0.70 CI 0.44 to 1.1, very low quality of evidence).We found no differences for contingency management compared with usual treatment (2 RCTs, n = 206) in numbers lost to treatment at 3 months (n = 176, 1 RCT, RR 1.65 CI 1.18 to 2.31, low quality of evidence), number of stimulant positive urine tests at 6 months (n = 176, 1 RCT, RR 0.83 CI 0.65 to 1.06, low quality of evidence) or hospitalisations (n = 176, 1 RCT, RR 0.21 CI 0.05 to 0.93, low quality of evidence).We were unable to summarise all 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 due to high or unclear risks of bias because of poor trial methods, or poorly reported methods, and imprecision due to small sample sizes, low event rates and wide confidence intervals.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We included 32 RCTs and found no compelling evidence to support any one psychosocial treatment over another for people to remain in treatment or to reduce substance use or improve mental state in people with serious mental illnesses. 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.

Combined MI + CBT for Depressive Symptoms and Binge Drinking Among Young Adults: Two Case Studies

There are high rates of comorbidity between heavy drinking and depressive symptoms among college students, often resulting in severe alcohol-related consequences. No empirically supported treatment exists that concurrently addresses both of these problems in this population. Research with college students has demonstrated that brief motivational interventions (BMIs) reduce heavy drinking and alcohol-related consequences, and that cognitive behavioral therapy for depression (CBT-D) is effective in reducing depressive symptoms. Thus, a program combining BMI and CBT-D appears ideal for college students with co-occurring binge drinking and depressive symptoms. This manuscript presents the rationale and format of a BMI + CBT-D treatment protocol for this population, and provides a case example of a female college student who received the protocol and experienced improvement in depressive symptoms, a reduction in alcohol use and alcohol-related negative consequences, and an increase in readiness to change alcohol consumption. We discuss theoretical and clinical implications of these findings, and suggest directions for future research.

Co-morbid PTSD and suicidality in individuals with schizophrenia and substance and alcohol abuse

BACKGROUND

Suicide risk is high in schizophrenic patients and is further elevated in dual diagnosis patients. Suicide behaviour is a continuum from ideation, plans to attempts. Exposure to traumatic stress and co-morbid PTSD is elevated in schizophrenic patients. Suicide behaviour is also common in non-psychotic PTSD patients. This study aimed to investigate the effect of trauma and co-morbid PTSD on suicide behaviour in dual diagnosis patients and whether co-morbid PTSD would further elevate suicide risk.

METHOD

This was a cross-sectional study in which suicide behaviour was compared in those with and without co-morbid PTSD in 110 patients suffering schizophrenia and alcohol and/or substance abuse.

RESULTS

100 (91%) reported at least one traumatic event with an average of 4.3 events. 31 (28%) patients met criteria for full PTSD. Current suicidal ideation was reported by 39 (35%) and 23 (21%) reported plans and ideation, 69 (63%) reported at least one previous suicide attempt. Suicide behaviour was significantly associated with an increasing number of traumatic events. Suicidality was significantly associated and elevated with co-morbid PTSD. Analysis indicated that the effect of trauma on suicide behaviour appeared to be mediated by hopelessness.

CONCLUSIONS

Suicide behaviour was not associated with exposure to trauma per se but was associated with incremental exposure to traumatic experiences. Consistent with the study hypotheses, co-morbid PTSD further adds to the risk of suicide behaviour in an already vulnerable group.

Trauma and comorbid posttraumatic stress disorder in individuals with schizophrenia and substance abuse

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate the occurrence of trauma and comorbid posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in dual diagnosis patients and whether the trauma was related to the patient's behavior or illness.

METHOD

One hundred ten patients with schizophrenia and comorbid substance or alcohol abuse were assessed for PTSD using self-report and structured interview. Traumatic events were classified as independent or dependent upon the patient's behavior, illness, or symptoms.

RESULTS

One hundred patients (91%) reported at least 1 trauma (mean, 4.3). Sixty-three patients (57%) reported a traumatic event that met modified-criterion A for PTSD. Thirty-one patients (28%) met criteria for full PTSD, and 18 (16%) had a trauma directly related to their illness. Patients with PTSD had significantly higher scores on positive psychotic symptoms and depression.

CONCLUSIONS

Exposures to traumatic events and comorbid PTSD are high but are inflated by reactions to illness-related events such as hospitalization and psychotic symptoms.

Auditory hallucinations and posttraumatic stress disorder within schizophrenia and substance abuse

There is a high prevalence of traumatic events within individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia and of auditory hallucinations within individuals diagnosed with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, the relationship among the symptoms associated with these disorders remains poorly understood. We conducted a multidimensional assessment of auditory hallucinations within a sample diagnosed with schizophrenia and substance abuse, both with and without comorbid PTSD. The results suggest a rate of comorbid PTSD similar to those reported in other studies. Patients who have comorbid PTSD reported more distressing auditory hallucinations. However, the hallucinations were not more frequent or of longer duration. The need for a multidimensional assessment is supported. The results are discussed within current theoretical accounts of traumatic psychosis.

Motivational interviewing for substance abuse

BACKGROUND

There are 76.3 million people with alcohol use disorders worldwide and 15.3 million with drug use disorders. Motivational interviewing (MI) is a client-centred, semi-directive method for enhancing intrinsic motivation to change by exploring and resolving ambivalence. The intervention is used widely, and therefore it is important to find out whether it helps, harms or is ineffective.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of motivational interviewing for substance abuse on drug use, retention in treatment, readiness to change, and number of repeat convictions.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched 18 electronic databases, 5 web sites, 4 mailing lists, and reference lists from included studies and reviews. Search dates were November 30, 2010 for Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase and PsychINFO.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials with persons dependent or abusing substance. Interventions were MI or motivational enhancement therapy. The outcomes were extent of substance abuse, retention in treatment, motivation for change, repeat conviction.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, and two authors extracted data. Results were categorized into (1) MI versus no-treatment control, (2) MI versus treatment as usual, (3) MI versus assessment and feedback, and (4) MI versus other active treatment. Within each category, we computed meta-analyses separately for post-intervention, short, medium and long follow-ups.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 59 studies with a total of 13,342 participants. Compared to no treatment control MI showed a significant effect on substance use which was strongest at post-intervention SMD 0.79, (95% CI 0.48 to 1.09) and weaker at short SMD 0.17 (95% CI 0.09 to 0.26], and medium follow-up SMD 0.15 (95% CI 0.04 to 0.25]). For long follow-up, the effect was not significant SMD 0.06 (95% CI-0.16 to 0.28). There were no significant differences between MI and treatment as usual for either follow-up post-intervention, short and medium follow up. MI did better than assessment and feedback for medium follow-up SMD 0.38 (95% CI 0.10 to 0.66). For short follow-up, there was no significant effect . For other active intervention there were no significant effects for either follow-up.There was not enough data to conclude about effects of MI on the secondary outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

MI can reduce the extent of substance abuse compared to no intervention. The evidence is mostly of low quality, so further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.

Integrated motivational interviewing and cognitive behavioural therapy for people with psychosis and comorbid substance misuse: randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of integrated motivational interviewing and cognitive behavioural therapy in addition to standard care for patients with psychosis and a comorbid substance use problem.

DESIGN

Two centre, open, rater blind randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Secondary care in the United Kingdom.

PARTICIPANTS

327 patients with a clinical diagnosis of schizophrenia, schizophreniform disorder, or schizoaffective disorder and a diagnosis of dependence on or misuse of drugs, alcohol, or both according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition.

INTERVENTION

The intervention was integrated motivational interviewing and cognitive behavioural therapy plus standard care, which was compared with standard care alone. Phase one of therapy-"motivation building"-concerns engaging the patient, then exploring and resolving ambivalence for change in substance use. Phase two-"action"-supports and facilitates change using cognitive behavioural approaches. Up to 26 therapy sessions were delivered over one year.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was death from any cause or admission to hospital in the 12 months after completion of therapy. Secondary outcomes were frequency and amount of substance use (assessed using the timeline followback method), readiness to change, perceived negative consequences of use, psychotic symptom ratings, number and duration of relapses, and global assessment of functioning and deliberate self harm at 12 and 24 months, with additional timeline followback assessments at 6 and 18 months. Analysis was by intention to treat and robust treatment effect estimates were produced.

RESULTS

327 participants were randomly allocated to either the intervention (n=164) or treatment as usual (n=163). At 24 months, 326 (99.7%) were assessed on the primary outcome and 246 (75.2%) on the main secondary outcomes. Treatment had no beneficial effect on hospital admissions or death during follow-up, with 23.3% (38/163) of the therapy group and 20.2% (33/163) of controls deceased or admitted (adjusted odds ratio 1.16, 95% confidence interval 0.68 to 1.99; P=0.579). Therapy had no effect on the frequency of substance use or the perceived negative consequences of misuse, but did have a statistically significant effect on amount used per substance using day (adjusted ORs for main substance 1.50, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.09; P=0.016; and all substances 1.48, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.05; P=0.017). Treatment had a statistically significant effect on readiness to change use at 12 months (adjusted OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.26 to 3.31; P=0.004) that was not maintained at 24 months (0.78, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.28; P=0.320). There were no effects of treatment on clinical outcomes such as relapses, psychotic symptoms, functioning, and self harm.

CONCLUSIONS

Integrated motivational interviewing and cognitive behavioural therapy for people with psychosis and substance misuse do not improve outcome in terms of hospitalisation, symptom outcomes, or functioning. This approach does reduce the amount of substance used for at least one year after completion of therapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials: ISRCTN14404480.

Traumatic events, posttraumatic stress disorder, attachment style, and working alliance in a sample of people with psychosis

There is a high incidence of trauma and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in people with a diagnosis of psychosis. Sequelae of trauma may affect the ability to engage in both attachment and therapeutic relationships. This study investigated associations between trauma histories, PTSD, attachment styles, and working alliance in a sample of 110 individuals with psychosis and substance misuse. Anxious attachment was associated with number of interpersonal traumas and PTSD reported, but there were no associations between trauma and alliance. There were discrepancies in number of traumatic events reported by care coordinators and patients. The findings of this study highlight the potential use of attachment theory in working with trauma and PTSD in psychosis.

Predicting therapeutic alliance in clients with psychosis and substance misuse

The importance of therapeutic alliance in predicting treatment outcomes is well established, but less is known about client characteristics that predict alliance. Clients with co-occurring psychosis and substance misuse (n = 116) who received integrated motivational interviewing and cognitive behavior therapy in the context of a large randomized controlled trial completed the Working Alliance Inventory. Their trial therapists also completed Working Alliance Inventories. Rating perspectives were compared, and in a cross-sectional study, client predictors of therapeutic alliance were examined. As hypothesized, clients' negative attitudes to treatment, including lack of insight, were predictive of poorer alliance. Therapist-rated alliance was also predicted by the client's attitude to medication, self-reported depression, and living situation. Symptom severity and substance use measures were unrelated to alliance. Consistent with previous studies, rating perspectives differed, with clients rating alliance more positive than therapists.

The evolution of cognitive behavior therapy for schizophrenia: current practice and recent developments

Cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) evolved from behavioral theory and developed to focus more on cognitive models that incorporated reappraisal of thinking errors and schema change strategies. This article will describe the key elements of CBT for schizophrenia and the current evidence of its efficacy and effectiveness. We conclude with a description of recent concepts that extend the theoretical basis of practice and expand the range of CBT strategies for use in schizophrenia. Mindfulness, meta-cognitive approaches, compassionate mind training, and method of levels are postulated as useful adjuncts for CBT with psychotic patients.