A pilot validation of a modified Illness Perceptions Questionnaire designed to predict response to cognitive therapy for psychosis

Assessment of illness representations in mental disorders: A mini review

Health beliefs, and especially illness representations, have been widely used to understand clinical outcomes and psychosocial adjustment in people with physical diseases. However, this area of research has been under-explored in the field of mental health, and the few studies that have been conducted have used very different methods. Therefore, the aim of our study was to identify the tools and methods that have been used to evaluate illness representations in psychiatry. To this end, a mini review has been conducted and 58 articles were retained. This mini review highlights that the quantitative method is the most used, and that the scales mobilised are often adapted for the study, but not validated. Indeed, multiple modifications and adaptations have been made by the authors (e.g. deletion of subscales, addition of items), which lead to questions about the reliability of what is measured. In the future, it is essential to have a validated generic tool for mental disorders, which could be based on the Illness perceptions questionnaire for schizophrenia.

Relationship Between Illness Representations, Psychosocial Adjustment, and Treatment Outcomes in Mental Disorders: A Mini Review

Understanding and improving the psychosocial adjustments (e.g., quality of life, depression) and treatment outcomes (e.g., adherence, beliefs about treatments) of people with mental disorders are major health issues. The self-regulation model (SRM) postulates that illness representations play a central role on adjustment and treatment of people with physical illnesses. Recently, the SRM has been used with people with mental disorders. However, the manifestations of somatic and psychiatric disorders can be very different. Therefore, the use of SRM in the field of mental health is very complex. This difficulty, as well as the growing interest for illness representations in the field of mental health, justifies the utility to conduct a review on this topic. The current review shows that illness representations are related to psychosocial adjustment and/or treatment outcomes for people with various mental disorders [e.g., psychotic disorders, mood disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)]. However, some limitations to the applicability of SRM to mental disorders have been highlighted. These limitations should be considered in future studies.

The U&I study: study protocol for a feasibility randomised controlled trial of a pre-cognitive behavioural therapy digital 'informed choice' intervention to improve attitudes towards uptake and implementation of CBT for psychosis

BACKGROUND

At least 40% of people with psychosis have persistent distressing symptoms despite optimal medication treatment. Cognitive behaviour therapy for psychosis (CBTp) is the only NICE-recommended individual therapy for psychosis, with effects on symptoms, distress and quality of life. Yet <10% of service-users receive it and 94% of trusts struggle to provide it. Of those offered it, 22-43% refuse or do not attend. We have developed a new pre-CBTp informed choice intervention to address knowledge and attitudes that influence uptake and implementation and now want to test it in a feasibility trial.

METHODS

The design is a two-arm, feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT), with 1:1 randomisation, stratified by participant group and site. Participants are 40 psychosis patients and 40 clinicians, who are ambivalent towards uptake or implementation of CBTp. Sites are community and inpatient services in Sussex and London. The intervention is a pre-CBT digital psychoeducation intervention designed to address identified knowledge and attitudinal barriers to uptake and implementation of CBTp, incorporating behaviour change mechanisms, and supported by animated introductory, patient and clinician stories. The comparator is the NHS choices website for CBT. The primary aim is to assess clinical feasibility (recruitment, randomisation, acceptability, use, delivery, outcome measurement, retention). A secondary aim is a preliminary evaluation of efficacy. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline, post intervention, and one-month follow-up (blind to treatment arm). The primary efficacy outcome is likelihood of offering/taking up CBTp. Secondary outcomes include knowledge and attitudes towards CBTp, illness perceptions, empowerment, psychological wellbeing (patients only) and CBTp implementation (clinicians only). Use of the intervention and CBT behaviours during the follow-up period will be recorded and captured in a feedback questionnaire. Use, acceptability and experience of outcome assessment will be explored in qualitative interviews with participants (n = 6 per group). The efficacy evaluation will report descriptive data, key model parameters and 95% highest probability density intervals in a Bayesian growth model.

DISCUSSION

This is the first feasibility trial of a digital 'informed choice' decision aid for the implementation of CBTp. If the trial proves feasible and demonstrates preliminary evidence of efficacy, a large multi-site trial will be warranted.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN53107879 . Registered prospectively on 2 August 2017.

Causal beliefs in people experiencing psychosis: The relationship to treatment accessed and the perceived helpfulness of treatment

PURPOSE

Research suggests that the way an individual understands a health difficulty can influence their subsequent behaviour. The aim of this study was to explore the psychometric properties of a new causal belief questionnaire for people who have experience of psychosis. We also planned to provide an overview of current causal beliefs within this group and to explore the relationship between these beliefs and the perceived helpfulness of treatment and the treatment accessed.

METHODS

Three hundred and eleven service-users with experience of psychosis completed a questionnaire designed to explore how they understand the cause of their difficulties. Additional information was collected about different aspects of treatment.

RESULTS

The results of the exploratory factor analysis indicated a two-factor solution comprising a psychosocial and biogenetic scale. Individuals in this study endorsed a variety of different causes, with an overall preference for psychosocial explanations. No relationships were established between beliefs and perceptions about the helpfulness of treatment. Individuals who had accessed cognitive behavioural therapy were more likely to endorse the psychosocial factor.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals with psychosis consider a number of factors to be important in relation to the development of their experiences. These beliefs should be explored as part of the therapeutic process as this appears to be important to the individual and could potentially help inform treatment decisions.

PRACTITIONER POINTS

The causal belief questionnaire captured two underlying constructs relating to psychosocial and biogenetic causes. Individuals within this group endorsed a range of factors; however, they prefer psychosocial causes overall. There was an indication that some aspects of an individual's beliefs were associated with the treatment they accessed.

Coping with Unusual ExperienceS for 12-18 year olds (CUES+): a transdiagnostic randomised controlled trial of the effectiveness of cognitive therapy in reducing distress associated with unusual experiences in adolescent mental health services: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Childhood 'unusual experiences' (such as hearing voices that others cannot, or suspicions of being followed) are common, but can become more distressing during adolescence, especially for young people in contact with Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS). Unusual experiences that are distressing or have adverse life impact (UEDs) are associated with a range of current and future emotional, behavioural and mental health difficulties. Recommendations for psychological intervention are based on evidence from adult studies, with some support from small, pilot, child-specific evaluations. Research is needed to ensure that the recommendations suit children as well as adults. The CUES+ study (Coping with Unusual ExperienceS for 12-18 year olds) aims to find out whether cognitive behaviour therapy for UEDs (CBT-UED) is a helpful and cost-effective addition to usual community care for 12-18 year olds presenting to United Kingdom National Health Service Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services in four London boroughs.

METHODS

The CUES+ study is a randomised controlled trial comparing CBT-UED plus routine care to routine care alone. CBT-UED comprises up to 16 sessions, including up to 12 individual and up to four family support meetings, each lasting around 45-60 min, delivered weekly. The primary outcome is emotional distress. Secondary outcomes are change in UEDs, risk events (self-harm, attendance at emergency services, other adverse events) and health economic outcomes. Participants will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio after baseline assessment. Randomisation will be stratified by borough and by severity of mental health presentation: 'severe' (an identified psychotic or bipolar disorder) or any 'other' condition. Outcomes will be assessed by a trained assessor blind to treatment condition at 0, 16 and 24 weeks. Recruitment began in February, 2015 and is ongoing until the end of March, 2017.

DISCUSSION

The CUES+ study will contribute to the currently limited child-specific evidence base for psychological interventions for UEDs occurring in the context of psychosis or any other mental health presentation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials, ID: ISRCTN21802136 . Prospectively registered on 12 January 2015. Protocol V3 31 August 2015 with screening amended.

SlowMo, a digital therapy targeting reasoning in paranoia, versus treatment as usual in the treatment of people who fear harm from others: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background

Paranoia is one of the most common symptoms of schizophrenia-spectrum disorders, and is associated with significant distress and disruption to the person’s life. Developing more effective and accessible psychological interventions for paranoia is a clinical priority. Our research team has approached this challenge in two main ways: firstly, by adopting an interventionist causal approach to increase effectiveness and secondly, by incorporating user-centred inclusive design methods to enhance accessibility and usability. Our resultant new digital intervention, SlowMo, intensively targets a reasoning style associated with paranoia, fast thinking, characterised by jumping to conclusions and belief inflexibility. It consists of an easy-to-use, enjoyable and memorable digital interface. An interactive web-based app facilitates delivery of face-to-face meetings which is then synchronised with an innovative mobile app for use in daily life.

Methods/Design

We aim to test the clinical efficacy of SlowMo over 24 weeks to determine the mechanisms through which it reduces paranoia, and to identify participant characteristics that moderate its effectiveness. In a parallel-group randomised controlled trial, with 1:1 allocation, 360 participants with distressing persecutory beliefs will be independently randomised to receive either the SlowMo intervention added to treatment as usual (TAU) or TAU, using randomly varying permuted blocks, stratified by paranoia severity and site. Research workers will be blind to therapy allocation. The primary outcome is paranoia severity over 24 weeks; our hypothesised mechanism of change is reasoning; moderators include negative symptoms and working memory; and secondary outcomes include wellbeing, quality of life, and service use. The accessibility, usability and acceptability of the digital platform will be assessed.

Discussion

SlowMo has been developed as the first blended digital therapy to target fears of harm from others through an inclusive design approach. In addition to testing its efficacy, this trial will add to our understanding of psychological mechanisms in paranoia. The study will examine the usability and adherence of a novel digital therapy, including an app for self-management, in a large sample of people affected by severe mental health difficulties.

Trial registration

ISRCTN registry, ID: ISRCTN32448671. Registered prospectively on 30 January 2017. Date assigned 2 February 2017.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2242-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Thinking Well: A randomised controlled feasibility study of a new CBT therapy targeting reasoning biases in people with distressing persecutory delusional beliefs

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Delusional beliefs with persecutory content are common in psychosis, but difficult to treat. Interventions targeting hypothesised causal and maintaining factors have been proposed as a way of improving therapy. The current study is a feasibility randomised controlled trial of the 'Thinking Well (TW)' intervention: This novel approach combines the recently developed Maudsley Review Training Programme (MRTP), with additional, focussed cognitive-behavioural therapy sessions.

METHODS

31 participants with distressing persecutory delusions and schizophrenia spectrum disorders were randomised to TW or to treatment as usual in a 2:1 ratio. Participants completed outcome assessments at 0 (baseline), 1 (post-MRTP), 6 (post-TW) and 8 (follow-up) weeks. Key outcomes included belief flexibility, paranoia, and delusional conviction and distress. Participants allocated to TW completed the MRTP package and four CBT sessions with a clinical psychologist.

RESULTS

Recruitment proved feasible. Participants reported the intervention was relevant and had resulted in positive changes in thinking and mood, which they could use in everyday life. Treatment effects were moderate-large for key outcomes including belief flexibility, paranoia conviction and distress. The additional TW sessions appeared to confer benefits over MRTP alone.

LIMITATIONS

Assessments were not carried out blind to treatment condition. Recruitment was opportunistic, from an identified pool of research participants. Finally, a few participants had already completed the MRTP as part of a previous study.

CONCLUSIONS

The TW intervention appears to be feasible and acceptable to participants, and the effects of treatment are promising. A fully powered randomised controlled trial of the intervention is warranted.