Pragmatic trials of complex psychosocial interventions: methodological challenges

Experiences of patients enrolled and staff involved in the prehabilitation of elective patients undergoing cardiac surgery trial: a nested qualitative study

The purpose of this study was to understand the views and experiences of patients enrolled and staff involved in the prehabilitation of elective patients undergoing cardiac surgery trial. This sub-study was informed by normalisation process theory, a framework for evaluating complex interventions, and used consecutive sampling to recruit patients assigned to both the intervention and control groups. Patients and all staff involved in delivering the trial were invited to participate in focus groups, which were recorded, transcribed verbatim and subjected to reflexive thematic analysis. Five focus groups were held comprising 24 participants in total (nine patients assigned to the prehabilitation; seven assigned to control; and eight staff). Five themes were identified. First, preparedness for surgery reduced fear, where participants described that knowing what to expect from surgery and preparing the body physically increased feelings of control and subsequently reduced apprehension regarding surgery. Second, staff were concerned but trusted in a safe environment, describing how, despite staff's concerns regarding the risks of exercise in this population, the patients felt safe in their care whilst participating in an exercise programme in hospital. Third, rushing for recovery and the curious carer, where patients from both groups wanted to mobilise quickly postoperatively whilst staff visited patients on the ward to observe their recovery progress. Fourth, to survive and thrive postoperatively, reflecting staff and patients' expectations from the trial and what motivated them to participate. Fifth, benefits are diluted by lengthy waiting periods, reflecting the frustration felt by patients waiting for their surgery after completing the intervention and the fear about continuing exercise at home before they had been 'fixed'. To conclude, functional exercise capacity may not have improved following prehabilitation in people before elective cardiac surgery due to concerns regarding the safety of exercise that may have hindered delivery and receipt of the intervention. Instead, numerous non-physical benefits were elicited. The information from this qualitative study offers valuable recommendations regarding refining a prehabilitation intervention and conducting a subsequent trial.

A psychological intervention for suicide applied to non-affective psychosis: the CARMS (Cognitive AppRoaches to coMbatting Suicidality) randomised controlled trial protocol

BACKGROUND

Suicide is a leading cause of death globally. Suicide deaths are elevated in those experiencing severe mental health problems, including schizophrenia. Psychological talking therapies are a potentially effective means of alleviating suicidal thoughts, plans, and attempts. However, talking therapies need to i) focus on suicidal experiences directly and explicitly, and ii) be based on testable psychological mechanisms. The Cognitive AppRoaches to coMbatting Suicidality (CARMS) project is a Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) which aims to investigate both the efficacy and the underlying mechanisms of a psychological talking therapy for people who have been recently suicidal and have non-affective psychosis.

METHODS

The CARMS trial is a two-armed single-blind RCT comparing a psychological talking therapy (Cognitive Behavioural Suicide Prevention for psychosis [CBSPp]) plus Treatment As Usual (TAU) with TAU alone. There are primary and secondary suicidality outcome variables, plus mechanistic, clinical, and health economic outcomes measured over time. The primary outcome is a measure of suicidal ideation at 6 months after baseline. The target sample size is 250, with approximately 125 randomised to each arm of the trial, and an assumption of up to 25% attrition. Hence, the overall recruitment target is up to 333. An intention to treat analysis will be used with primary stratification based on National Health Service (NHS) recruitment site and antidepressant prescription medication. Recruitment will be from NHS mental health services in the North West of England, UK. Participants must be 18 or over; be under the care of mental health services; have mental health problems which meet ICD-10 non-affective psychosis criteria; and have experienced self-reported suicidal thoughts, plans, and/or attempts in the 3 months prior to recruitment. Nested qualitative work will investigate the pathways to suicidality, experiences of the therapy, and identify potential implementation challenges beyond a trial setting as perceived by numerous stake-holders.

DISCUSSION

This trial has important implications for countering suicidal experiences for people with psychosis. It will provide definitive evidence about the efficacy of the CBSPp therapy; the psychological mechanisms which lead to suicidal experiences; and provide an understanding of what is required to implement the intervention into services should it be efficacious.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03114917), 14th April 2017. ISRCTN (reference ISRCTN17776666 https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN17776666); 5th June 2017). Registration was recorded prior to participant recruitment commencing.

Evaluation of a positive psychotherapy group intervention for people with psychosis: pilot randomised controlled trial

AIMS

Third-wave psychological interventions have gained relevance in mental health service provision but their application to people with psychosis is in its infancy and interventions targeting wellbeing in psychosis are scarce. This study tested the feasibility and preliminary effectiveness of positive psychotherapy adapted for people with psychosis (WELLFOCUS PPT) to improve wellbeing.

METHODS

WELLFOCUS PPT was tested as an 11-week group intervention in a convenience sample of people with psychosis in a single centre randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN04199273) involving 94 people with psychosis. Patients were individually randomised in blocks to receive either WELLFOCUS PPT in addition to treatment as usual (TAU), or TAU only. Assessments took place before randomisation and after the therapy. The primary outcome was wellbeing (Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale, WEMWBS). Secondary outcomes included symptoms (Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale), depression (Short Depression-Happiness Scale), self-esteem, empowerment, hope, sense of coherence, savouring beliefs and functioning, as well as two alternative measures of wellbeing (the Positive Psychotherapy Inventory and Quality of Life). Intention-to-treat analysis was performed. This involved calculating crude changes and paired-sample t-tests for all variables, as well as ANCOVA and Complier Average Causal Effect (CACE) Analysis to estimate the main effect of group on all outcomes.

RESULTS

The intervention and trial procedures proved feasible and well accepted. Crude changes between baseline and follow-up showed a significant improvement in the intervention group for wellbeing according to all three concepts assessed (i.e., WEMWBS, Positive Psychotherapy Inventory and Quality of Life), as well as for symptoms, depression, hope, self-esteem and sense of coherence. No significant changes were observed in the control group. ANCOVA showed no main effect on wellbeing according to the primary outcome scale (WEMWBS) but significant effects on symptoms (p = 0.006, ES = 0.42), depression (p = 0.03, ES = 0.38) and wellbeing according to the Positive Psychotherapy Inventory (p = 0.02, ES = 0.30). Secondary analysis adapting for therapy group further improved the results for symptom reduction (p = 0.004, ES = 0.43) and depression (p = 0.03, ES = 0.41) but did not lead to any more outcomes falling below the p = 0.05 significance level. CACE analysis showed a non-significant positive association between the intervention and WEMWBS scores at follow-up (b = 0.21, z = 0.9, p = 0.4).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides initial evidence on the feasibility of WELLFOCUS PPT in people with psychosis, positively affecting symptoms and depression. However, more work is needed to optimise its effectiveness. Future research might evaluate positive psychotherapy as a treatment for comorbid depression in psychosis, and consider alternative measurements of wellbeing.

UPBEAT-UK: a programme of research into the relationship between coronary heart disease and depression in primary care patients

Background

Depression is common in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) but the relationship is uncertain. In the UK, general practitioners (GPs) have been remunerated for finding depression in CHD patients; however, it is unclear how to manage these patients.

Objectives

Our aim was to explore the relationship between CHD and depression in a GP population and to develop nurse-led personalised care (PC) for patients with CHD and depression.

Design

The UPBEAT-UK study consisted of four related studies. A cohort study of patients from CHD registers to explore the relationship between CHD and depression. A metasynthesis of relevant literature and two qualitative studies [patients’ perspectives and GP/practice nurse (PN) views on management of CHD and depression] helped develop an intervention. A pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) of PC was conducted.

Setting

Thirty-three GP surgeries in south London.

Participants

Adult patients on GP CHD registers.

Interventions

From the qualitative studies, we developed nurse-led PC, combining case management and self-management theory. Following biopsychosocial assessment, a PC plan was devised for each patient with chest pain and depressive symptoms. Nurses helped patients address their most important related problems. Use of existing resources was promoted. Nurse time was conserved through telephone follow-up.

Main outcome measures

The main outcome of the pilot study of our newly developed PC for people with depression and CHD was to assess the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention and to decide on the best outcome measures. Depression, measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale – depression subscale, and chest pain, measured by the Rose angina questionnaire, were the main outcome measures for the feasibility and cohort studies. Cardiac outcomes in the cohort study included: attendance at rapid access chest pain clinics, stent insertion, bypass graft surgery, myocardial infarction and cardiovascular death. Service use and costs were measured and linked to quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Data for the pilot RCT were obtained by research assistants from patient interviews at baseline, 1, 6 and 12 months for the pilot RCT and at baseline and 6-monthly interviews for up to 36 months for the cohort study, using standard questionnaires.

Results

Personalised care was acceptable to patients and proved feasible. The reporting of chest pain in the intervention group was half that of the control group at 6 months, and this reduction was maintained at 1 year. There was also a small improvement in self-efficacy measures in the intervention group at 12 months. Anxiety was more prevalent than depression in our CHD cohort over the 3 years. Nearly half of the cohort complained of chest pain at outset, with two-thirds of these being suggestive of angina. Baseline exertional chest pain (suggestive of angina), anxiety and depression were independent predictors of adverse cardiac outcome. Psychosocial factors predicted the continued reporting of exertional chest pain across the 3 years of follow-up. Costs were slightly lower for the PC group but QALYs were also lower. Neither difference was statistically significant.

Conclusions

Chest pain, anxiety, depression and social problems are common in patients on CHD registers in primary care and predict adverse cardiac outcomes. Together they pose a complex management problem for GPs and PNs. Our pilot trial of PC suggests a promising approach for treatment of these patients. Generalisation is limited because of the selection bias in recruitment of the practices and the subsequent participation rate of the CHD register patients, and the fact that the research took place in south London boroughs. Future work should explicitly explore methods for effective implementation of the intervention, including staff training needs and changes to practice.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN21615909.

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. 4, No. 8. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

WELLFOCUS PPT - modified positive psychotherapy to improve well-being in psychosis: study protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The promotion of well-being is an important goal of recovery oriented mental health services. No structured, evidence-based intervention exists that aims to increase the well-being in people with severe mental illness such as psychosis. Positive psychotherapy (PPT) is a promising intervention for this goal. Standard PPT was adapted for use with people with psychosis in the UK following the Medical Research Council framework for developing and testing complex interventions, resulting in the WELLFOCUS Model describing the intended impact of WELLFOCUS PPT. This study aims to test the WELLFOCUS Model, by piloting the intervention, trial processes, and evaluation strategy.

METHODS/DESIGN

This study is a non-blinded pragmatic pilot RCT comparing WELLFOCUS PPT provided as an 11-session group therapy in addition to treatment as usual to treatment as usual alone. Inclusion criteria are adults (aged 18-65 years) with a main diagnosis of psychosis who use mental health services. A target sample of 80 service users with psychosis are recruited from mental health services across the South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust. Participants are randomised in blocks to the intervention and control group. WELLFOCUS PPT is provided to groups by specifically trained and supervised local therapists and members of the research team. Assessments are conducted before randomisation and after the group intervention. The primary outcome measure is well-being assessed by the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale. Secondary outcomes include good feelings, symptom relief, connectedness, hope, self-worth, empowerment, and meaning. Process evaluation using data collected during the group intervention, post-intervention individual interviews and focus groups with participants, and interviews with trial therapists will complement quantitative outcome data.

DISCUSSION

This study will provide data on the feasibility of the intervention and identify necessary adaptations. It will allow optimisation of trial processes and inform the evaluation strategy, including sample size calculation, for a future definitive RCT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN04199273 - WELLFOCUS study: an intervention to improve well-being in people with psychosis, Date registered: 27 March 2013, first participant randomised on 26 April 2013.

A new generation of pragmatic trials of psychosocial interventions is needed

This Editorial addresses the crucial issue of which research methodology is most suited for capturing the complexity of psychosocial interventions conducted in 'real world' mental health settings. It first examines conventional randomized controlled trial (RCT) methodology and critically appraises its strengths and weaknesses. It then considers the specificity of mental health care treatments and defines the term 'complex' intervention and its implications for RCT design. The salient features of pragmatic RCTs aimed at generating evidence of psychosocial intervention effectiveness are then described. Subsequently, the conceptualization of pragmatic RCTs, and of their further developments - which we propose to call 'new generation' pragmatic trials - in the broader routine mental health service context, is explored. Helpful tools for planning pragmatic RCTs, such as the CONSORT extension for pragmatic trials, and the PRECIS tool are also examined. We then discuss some practical challenges that are involved in the design and implementation of pragmatic trials based on our own experience in conducting the GET UP PIANO Trial. Lastly, we speculate on the ways in which current ideas on the purpose, scope and ethics of mental health care research may determine further challenges for clinical research and evidence-based practice.