Comparisons between psychosis samples with different patterns of substance use recruited for clinical and epidemiological studies

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.

Longitudinal evidence for a relation between depressive symptoms and quality of life in schizophrenia using structural equation modeling

Patients diagnosed with schizophrenia often report a low quality of life (QoL). The purpose of this study was to investigate whether we could replicate a cross-sectional model by Alessandrini et al. (2016, n = 271) and whether this model predicts QoL later in life. This model showed strong associations between schizophrenia spectrum symptoms and depressive symptoms on QoL, but lacked follow-up assessment. This model was adapted in the current study and the robustness was investigated by using a longitudinal design in which the association between baseline variables (including IQ, depression, schizophrenia spectrum symptoms as well as social functioning) and QoL during 3-years of follow-up was investigated. We included patients with a non-affective psychotic disorder (n = 744) from a prospective naturalistic cohort-study. In the cross-sectional model, with good measure of fit, both depression as well as social functioning was associated with QoL (direct path coefficient -0.28 and 0.41, respectively). Additionally, the severity of schizophrenia spectrum symptoms was highly associated with social functioning (direct path coefficient -0.70). Importantly, the longitudinal model showed good measures of fit, which strengthens the validity of the initial model and highlights that depression prospectively affect QoL while schizophrenia spectrum symptoms prospectively influence QoL via social functioning. The negative, longitudinal impact of a depression on QoL highlights the need to focus on treatment of this co-morbidity.

Treating depressive episodes or symptoms in patients with schizophrenia

Depressive episodes or symptoms occur frequently in patients with schizophrenia and may have far-reaching consequences. Despite the high prevalence rate and clinical relevance of this comorbidity, knowledge about treatment options is still limited. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the literature concerning treatment options for depressive episodes or symptoms in schizophrenia. Based on the current evidence, we present a stepwise treatment approach. The first step is to evaluate the current antipsychotic treatment of psychotic symptoms and consider lowering the dosage, since increased blockade of the dopamine D2 receptors may be associated with a worse subjective sense of well-being and dysphoria. A second step is to consider switching antipsychotics, since there are indications that some antipsychotics (including sulpiride, clozapine, olanzapine, aripiprazole, quetiapine, lurasidone, or amisulpride) are slightly more effective in reducing depressive symptoms compared to other antipsychotics or placebo. In the case of a persistent depressive episode, additional therapeutic interventions are indicated. However, the evidence is indecisive regarding the treatment of choice: either starting cognitive-behavioral therapy or adding an antidepressant. A limited number of studies examined the use of antidepressants in depressed patients with schizophrenia showing modest effectiveness. Overall, additional research is needed to determine the most effective treatment approach for patients with schizophrenia and depressive episodes.

A randomized, controlled trial of the efficacy of an interoceptive exposure-based CBT for treatment-refractory outpatients with opioid dependence

Many patients diagnosed with opioid dependence do not adequately respond to pharmacologic, psychosocial, or combination treatment, highlighting the importance of novel treatment strategies for this population. The current study examined the efficacy of a novel behavioral treatment focusing on internal cues for drug use (Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Interoceptive Cues; CBT-IC) relative to an active comparison condition, Individual Drug Counseling (IDC), when added to methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) among those who had not responded to MMT. Participants (N=78) were randomly assigned to receive 15 sessions of CBT-IC or IDC as an adjunct to ongoing MMT and counseling. Oral toxicology screens were the primary outcome. Results indicated no treatment differences between CBT-IC and IDC and a small, significant reduction of self-reported drug use, but no change on toxicology screens. Tests of potential moderators, including sex, anxiety sensitivity, and coping motives for drug use, did not yield significant interactions. Among opioid-dependent outpatients who have not responded to MMT and counseling, the addition of IDC or CBT-IC did not result in additive outcome benefits. These results highlight the need for more potent treatment strategies for opioid dependence, particularly among those who do not fully respond to frontline treatment.

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.

Anxiety and depression and their links with delusions and hallucinations in people with a dual diagnosis of psychosis and substance misuse: a study using data from a randomised controlled trial

Rates of depression and anxiety have been linked to severity and distress associated with positive symptoms in psychosis. There is also tentative evidence to suggest that these concurrent symptoms might be related to delusional and hallucinatory content. Our aim was to assess the cross-sectional associations between anxiety and depression, and hallucination and delusion severity and distress in a sample of 327 people dually diagnosed with psychosis and substance misuse problems. In addition, the relationships between specific symptom content and levels of anxiety and depression were examined. Anxiety was associated with delusion distress and depression with hallucination distress, although neither was related to symptom severity. Auditory commands to harm or kill the self were associated with higher levels of depression. Delusions with themes pertaining to the paranormal, and those with references to celebrities were associated with lower levels of depression. No specific delusion or hallucination content was associated with level of anxiety, when other variables were controlled for. The results demonstrate that anxiety and depression are linked to distinct aspects of psychotic experience, highlighting the need to acknowledge the role of these concurrent symptoms in the context of psychosis. In addition, findings relating to specific types of delusions and hallucinations highlight avenues for further research.

Associations between substance use, neuropsychological functioning and treatment response in psychosis

Relationships between substance use, severity of psychosis, and neuropsychological functioning were examined, together with their associations with treatment response and retention status. Participants included 477 people with psychosis (354 volunteers registered on a research database, and 123 enrolled in a treatment trial for substance misuse). Variables of primary interest included substance use history, course of psychotic disorder, and neuropsychological functioning on the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS). Specific RBANS deficits were associated with a more chronic illness course. Compared to those with a stable or chronic course, younger people with a single episode of psychosis were more likely to have uncertain diagnoses, higher levels of substance use problems and variable neuropsychological functioning. History of substance use was not associated with additional overall neuropsychological deficits. Likewise, treatment retention and outcome were not associated with neuropsychological functioning. The findings suggest that, among people with co-existing psychotic and substance use disorders, response to cognitive-behaviour therapy is likely to be independent of neuropsychological functioning. Consideration should also be given to the potential use of neuropsychological assessments to assist differentiation of likely substance-associated psychosis from primary psychosis.

Prevalence of Substance Use in People With First-Episode Psychosis

OBJECTIVE

People experiencing a first episode of psychosis often have co-occurring substance use, which increases risk of prolonged psychosis and impairs recovery. This article examines the prevalence of substance use in people with first-episode psychosis.

METHODS

The authors searched MEDLINE and other databases for articles published between 1990 and 2009 that described current or lifetime prevalence of substance use, misuse, abuse, or dependence in individuals with first-episode psychosis.

RESULTS

Forty-four unique studies provided information. More than 25% of individuals with first-episode psychosis in reviewed studies indicated current or lifetime alcohol use, lifetime alcohol abuse/dependence, current or lifetime cannabis use, or lifetime cannabis abuse or dependence. For all substances, lifetime prevalence of abuse/dependence was higher than current abuse/dependence.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite variation in assessment methods, findings were generally consistent. Individuals with first-episode psychosis have lower current substance prevalence than lifetime prevalence, suggesting cessation of some substance use prior to seeking treatment for psychosis.

The burden of depressive symptoms in people with schizophrenia

People with schizophrenia and concurrent depressive symptoms have poorer long-term functional outcomes compared with the nondepressed. Their poorer quality of life, greater use of mental health services, and higher risk of involvement with law enforcement agencies underscore a need for special treatment interventions. Treatment of the nonpsychotic dimensions of schizophrenia is a critical part of recovery. In a 3-year study, the depressed cohort was significantly more likely than the nondepressed to use relapse-related mental health services (emergency psychiatric services, sessions with psychiatrists); to be a safety concern (violent, arrested, victimized, or suicidal); to have greater substance-related problems; and to report poorer life satisfaction, quality of life, mental functioning, family relationships, and medication adherence. Furthermore, changes in depressed status were associated with changes in functional outcomes.

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

Major problems with existing RCTs evaluating psychosocial interventions for psychosis and substance misuse have been identified, in particular small sample sizes, high attrition rates, and short follow up periods. With a sample size of 327 and a follow up of 2 years, the MIDAS trial in the UK is to date the largest RCT for people with psychosis and substance use and is evaluating an integrated MI and CBT ("MiCBT") client therapy. Whilst the outcomes of the study are not yet available, data on recruitment and retention indicate that attrition rates in MIDAS are low and the majority of those allocated to treatment received a substantial number of therapy sessions. Sample characteristics are in line with those reported in epidemiological studies and are indicative of the challenges facing mental health services attempting to manage the client group: substance use is often longstanding, with frequent use at moderate or severe level and low motivation for change, and seen in the context of low levels of functioning and significant psychopathology. We conclude that this is a methodologically robust study that will have results generalisable to mental health services.

Psychosocial treatments for people with co-occurring severe mental illnesses and substance use disorders (dual diagnosis): a review of empirical evidence

Considerable research documents the health consequences of psychosis and co-occurring substance use disorders. Results of randomized controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for persons with dual diagnoses are equivocal but encouraging. Many studies are hampered by small, heterogeneous samples, high attrition rates, short follow-up periods, and unclear description of treatment components. The treatments available for this group of patients (which can be tailored to individual needs) include motivational interviewing, cognitive-behavioral therapy, contingency management, relapse prevention, case management, and skills training. Regardless of whether services follow integrated or parallel models, they should be well coordinated, take a team approach, be multidisciplinary, have specialist-trained personnel (including 24-hour access), include a range of program types, and provide for long-term follow-up. Interventions for substance reduction may need to be further developed and adapted for people with serious mental illnesses. Further quality trials in this area will contribute to the growing body of data of effective interventions.

Design paper: The CapOpus trial: a randomized, parallel-group, observer-blinded clinical trial of specialized addiction treatment versus treatment as usual for young patients with cannabis abuse and psychosis

Background

A number of studies indicate a link between cannabis-use and psychosis as well as more severe psychosis in those with existing psychotic disorders. There is currently insufficient evidence to decide the optimal way to treat cannabis abuse among patients with psychosis.

Objectives

The major objective for the CapOpus trial is to evaluate the additional effect on cannabis abuse of a specialized addiction treatment program adding group treatment and motivational interviewing to treatment as usual.

Design

The trial is designed as a randomized, parallel-group, observer-blinded clinical trial. Patients are primarily recruited through early-psychosis detection teams, community mental health centers, and assertive community treatment teams. Patients are randomized to one of two treatment arms, both lasting six months: 1) specialized addiction treatment plus treatment as usual or 2) treatment as usual. The specialized addiction treatment is manualized and consists of both individual and group-based motivational interviewing and cognitive behavioral therapy, and incorporates both the family and the case manager of the patient.

The primary outcome measure will be changes in amount of cannabis consumption over time. Other outcome measures will be psychosis symptoms, cognitive functioning, quality of life, social functioning, and cost-benefit analyses.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00484302.

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 substance reduction in people with a serious mental illness.

SEARCH STRATEGY

For this update (2007) we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (May 2006) which is based on regular searches of major 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

We extracted data independently. For dichotomous data we calculated relative risks (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis, based on a random effects model. We calculated numbers needed to treat/harm (NNT/NNH) where data were homogeneous. For continuous data, we calculated weighted mean differences (WMD) again based on a random effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

Evaluation of long-term integrated care included 4 RCTs (total n=735). We found no significant difference on measures of substance use (n=85, 1 RCT, RR 0.89 CI 0.6 to 1.3) or loss to treatment (n=603, 3 RCTs, RR 1.09 CI 0.8 to 1.5). For the non-integrated intensive case management trials (4 RCTs, total n=151) we also found no significant difference for loss (n=134, 3 RCTs, RR 1.35 CI 0.8 to 2.2). Motivational interviewing plus cognitive behavioural therapy (3 RCTs, total n=276) did not reveal any advantage for retaining participants (n=36, 1 RCT, RR lost to treatment 0.50 CI 0.1 to 5.0) or for relapse (n=36, 1 RCT, RR 0.58 CI 0.3 to 1.1), and no benefit for reducing substance use (n=119, 1 RCT, RR 0.19 CI -0.2 to 0.6). Cognitive behavioural therapy alone (4 trials, total n=260) showed fewer participants lost from treatment (n=260, 4 RCTs, p=0.02, RR 0.61 CI 0.4 to 0.9). No benefits were observed on measures of lessening cannabis use (n=47, 1 RCT, RR 1.30 CI 0.8 to 2.2) or on the number of participants using substances (alcohol; n=46, 1 RCT, RR 5.88 CI 0.8 to 44.0, drugs; n=46, 1 RCT, RR 2.02 CI 0.9 to 4.8) and no differences were observed on measures of mental state (n=105, 1 RCT, RR 0.52 CI -0.8 to 1.8). We found no advantage for motivational interviewing alone (5 trials, total n=338) in reducing 'lost to evaluation' (n=338, 5 RCTs, RR 0.96 CI 0.6 to 1.5) compared with treatment as usual, although significantly more participants in the motivational interviewing group reported for their first aftercare appointment (n=93, 1 RCT, RR 0.69 CI 0.5 to 0.9, NNT 4 CI 3 to 12). Some differences were observed in abstaining from alcohol favouring treatment (n=28, 1 RCT, RR 0.36 CI 0.2 to 0.8, NNT 2 CI 2 to 5), but not other substances (n=89, 1 RCT, RR -0.07 CI -0.6 to 0.4) and no differences were observed in mental state (n=30, 1 RCT, WMD -4.20 CI -18.7 to 10.3). Finally, 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 0.4 to 1.1).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We included 25 RCTs and found no compelling evidence to support any one psychosocial treatment over another to reduce substance use (or improve mental state) by people with serious mental illnesses. Furthermore, methodological difficulties exist which hinder pooling and interpreting results; high drop out rates, varying fidelity of interventions, varying outcome measures, settings and samples and comparison groups may have received higher levels of treatment than standard care. Further studies are required which address these concerns and improve the evidence in this important area.

Meta-analysis of depressive symptoms in dual-diagnosis schizophrenia

Substance abuse is highly prevalent in schizophrenia and associated with numerous negative consequences. While studies have regularly reported more severe depressive symptoms in addicted schizophrenia patients relative to non-abusing patients, some studies have not corroborated this finding. The current meta-analysis was performed to quantify the relative severity of depressive symptoms in dual-diagnosis schizophrenia. A search of the literature using computerized engines was undertaken. Studies were retained in the analysis if (i) they assessed depressive symptoms using validated scales specific to depression (e.g. Hamilton Depression Rating Scale); and (ii) groups of schizophrenia patients were divided according to substance use disorders (alcohol, amphetamines, cannabis, cocaine, hallucinogens, heroin and/or phencyclidine). According to the inclusion criteria, 20 studies were available for mathematical analysis. A small, positive and significant effect size estimate (n =3283; 1680 dual diagnosis; 1603 single diagnosis; adjusted Hedges's g =0.292; p =0.003) was obtained, within a random-effect model, suggesting that some dual-diagnosis patients experience more severe depressive symptoms than single-diagnosis patients. This significant difference was found only for studies using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale but not for other depression scales. The results of the present meta-analysis suggest that addicted schizophrenia patients experience more severe depressive symptoms compared to non-abusing patients, but that the difference is smaller than commonly assumed. The meta-analysis also shows that the significance of results is related to the scale used to measure depressive symptoms. These results have methodological implications for future studies of depressive symptoms in dual-diagnosis patients, and potential implications for the prevention and treatment of depressive symptoms in schizophrenia.

The burden of depressive symptoms in the long-term treatment of patients with schizophrenia

OBJECTIVE

To prospectively measure the link between depressive symptoms and functional outcomes in the long-term treatment of people with schizophrenia.

METHODS

Data were drawn from a large, multi-site, 3-year, prospective, naturalistic, observational study, in which subjects with schizophrenia were assessed at enrollment and at 12-month intervals thereafter. Individuals who were "Depressed" (defined as a total score > or =16 on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale) at enrollment were compared to those "Non-depressed" on functional outcomes, using self-report measures, clinicians' ratings, and information from medical records. Statistical analyses included Generalized Estimation Equation and mixed regression analyses adjusted for individual characteristics. Longitudinal group comparisons across the 3-year study were augmented with a cross-sectional group comparison at enrollment.

RESULTS

At enrollment, 39.4% (877/2228) of the participants were deemed Depressed. Across the 3-year study, the depressed cohort was significantly more likely than the Non-depressed to use relapse-related mental health services (emergency psychiatric services, sessions with psychiatrists); to be a safety concern (violent, arrested, victimized, suicidal); to have greater substance-related problems; and to report poorer life satisfaction, quality of life, mental functioning, family relationships, and medication adherence. Furthermore, changes in depressed status were associated with changes in functional outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

People with schizophrenia and concurrent depressive symptoms have poorer long-term functional outcomes compared to the Non-depressed. Their poorer quality of life, greater use of mental health services, and higher risk of involvement with law enforcement agencies underscore a need for special treatment interventions. Treatment of the non-psychotic dimensions of schizophrenia is a critical part of recovery.

Neuroscience Institute of Schizophrenia and Allied Disorders (NISAD): 10 years of Australia's first virtual research institute

OBJECTIVE

To review the first 10 years of operation of the Neuroscience Institute of Schizophrenia and Allied Disorders (NISAD), Australia's first virtual research institute.

METHOD

Narrative description of the evolution of NISAD.

RESULTS

Since inception in 1996, NISAD has developed a wide range of activities to enhance existing efforts and develop new initiatives in schizophrenia research, initially throughout New South Wales, but increasingly on a national scale. This involved the initial development of critical research infrastructure to provide the foundation, with the subsequent focus on developing a multidisciplinary programme of schizophrenia research, across the basic to applied research spectrum. While the primary focus has been the scientific domain, NISAD has also played a leading role in increasing public awareness of schizophrenia as a disease amenable to scientific investigation.

CONCLUSION

NISAD has succeeded in building a framework to apply the latest developments in neuroscience to the study of schizophrenia and has formed a multidisciplinary network of clinicians and neuroscientists who are actively collaborating on a range of research initiatives. The 'virtual institute' structure of NISAD has proven cost-efficient and consistent with innovative thinking about research resource management.

Cognitive-behavioural therapy for substance use disorders in people with psychotic disorders: Randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Few randomised controlled trials have been aimed specifically at substance use reduction among people with psychotic disorders.

AIMS

To investigate whether a 10-session intervention consisting of motivational interviewing and cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) was more efficacious than routine treatment in reducing substance use and improving symptomatology and general functioning.

METHOD

A community sample of people with a psychotic disorder and who reported hazardous alcohol, cannabis and/or amphetamine use during the preceding month was recruited. Participants were randomly allocated to motivational interviewing/CBT (n = 65) or treatment as usual (n = 65), and were assessed on multiple outcomes at baseline, 15 weeks, 6 months and 12 months.

RESULTS

There was a short-term improvement in depression and a similar trend with regard to cannabis use among participants who received the motivational interviewing/CBT intervention, together with effects on general functioning at 12 months. There was no differential benefit of the intervention on substance use at 12 months, except for a potentially clinically important effect on amphetamine use.

CONCLUSIONS

The motivational interviewing/CBT intervention was associated with modest improvements.