A randomized controlled pilot study of motivational interviewing for patients with psychotic and drug use disorders

Psychosocial Interventions for Individuals With Comorbid Psychosis and Substance Use Disorders: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Studies

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS

Substance use is highly prevalent among people with schizophrenia (SCZ) and related disorders, however, there is no broad-spectrum pharmacotherapy that concurrently addresses both addiction and psychotic symptoms. Psychosocial (PS) interventions, which have yielded promising results in treating psychosis and substance dependence separately, demonstrate potential but have not been systematically evaluated when combined.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and random-effects meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating PS interventions for individuals with comorbid substance use and psychotic disorders, encompassing SCZ and schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD). We included relevant studies published from MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar through May 2023.

STUDY RESULTS

We included 35 RCTs (5176 participants total; approximately 2840 with SSD). Intervention durations ranged from 30 min to 3 years. Meta-analysis did not identify a statistically significant pooled PS intervention effect on the main primary outcome, substance use (18 studies; 803 intervention, 733 control participants; standardized mean difference, -0.05 standard deviation [SD]; 95% CI, -0.16, 0.07 SD; I2 = 18%). PS intervention effects on other outcomes were also not statistically significant. Overall GRADE certainty of evidence was low.

CONCLUSIONS

At present, the literature lacks sufficient evidence supporting the use of PS interventions as opposed to alternative therapeutic approaches for significantly improving substance use, symptomatology, or functioning in people with SCZ and related disorders. However, firm conclusions were precluded by low certainty of evidence. Further RCTs are needed to determine the efficacy of PS treatments for people with dual-diagnoses (DD), either alone or in combination with pharmacotherapy.

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.

Motivational interviewing for substance use reduction

BACKGROUND

Substance use is a global issue, with around 30 to 35 million individuals estimated to have a substance-use disorder. Motivational interviewing (MI) is a client-centred method that aims to strengthen a person's motivation and commitment to a specific goal by exploring their reasons for change and resolving ambivalence, in an atmosphere of acceptance and compassion. This review updates the 2011 version by Smedslund and colleagues.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of motivational interviewing for substance use on the extent of substance use, readiness to change, and retention in treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 18 electronic databases, six websites, four mailing lists, and the reference lists of included studies and reviews. The last search dates were in February 2021 and November 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials with individuals using drugs, alcohol, or both. Interventions were MI or motivational enhancement therapy (MET), delivered individually and face to face. Eligible control interventions were no intervention, treatment as usual, assessment and feedback, or other active intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane, and assessed the certainty of evidence with GRADE. We conducted meta-analyses for the three outcomes (extent of substance use, readiness to change, retention in treatment) at four time points (post-intervention, short-, medium-, and long-term follow-up).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 93 studies with 22,776 participants. MI was delivered in one to nine sessions. Session durations varied, from as little as 10 minutes to as long as 148 minutes per session, across included studies. Study settings included inpatient and outpatient clinics, universities, army recruitment centres, veterans' health centres, and prisons. We judged 69 studies to be at high risk of bias in at least one domain and 24 studies to be at low or unclear risk. Comparing MI to no intervention revealed a small to moderate effect of MI in substance use post-intervention (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 0.89; I2 = 75%; 6 studies, 471 participants; low-certainty evidence). The effect was weaker at short-term follow-up (SMD 0.20, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.28; 19 studies, 3351 participants; very low-certainty evidence). This comparison revealed a difference in favour of MI at medium-term follow-up (SMD 0.12, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.20; 16 studies, 3137 participants; low-certainty evidence) and no difference at long-term follow-up (SMD 0.12, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.25; 9 studies, 1525 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was no difference in readiness to change (SMD 0.05, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.22; 5 studies, 1495 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Retention in treatment was slightly higher with MI (SMD 0.26, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.52; 2 studies, 427 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Comparing MI to treatment as usual revealed a very small negative effect in substance use post-intervention (SMD -0.14, 95% CI -0.27 to -0.02; 5 studies, 976 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was no difference at short-term follow-up (SMD 0.07, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.17; 14 studies, 3066 participants), a very small benefit of MI at medium-term follow-up (SMD 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.22; 9 studies, 1624 participants), and no difference at long-term follow-up (SMD 0.06, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.17; 8 studies, 1449 participants), all with low-certainty evidence. There was no difference in readiness to change (SMD 0.06, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.39; 2 studies, 150 participants) and retention in treatment (SMD -0.09, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.16; 5 studies, 1295 participants), both with very low-certainty evidence. Comparing MI to assessment and feedback revealed no difference in substance use at short-term follow-up (SMD 0.09, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.23; 7 studies, 854 participants; low-certainty evidence). A small benefit for MI was shown at medium-term (SMD 0.24, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.40; 6 studies, 688 participants) and long-term follow-up (SMD 0.24, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.41; 3 studies, 448 participants), both with moderate-certainty evidence. None of the studies in this comparison measured substance use at the post-intervention time point, readiness to change, and retention in treatment. Comparing MI to another active intervention revealed no difference in substance use at any follow-up time point, all with low-certainty evidence: post-intervention (SMD 0.07, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.29; 3 studies, 338 participants); short-term (SMD 0.05, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.13; 18 studies, 2795 participants); medium-term (SMD 0.08, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.17; 15 studies, 2352 participants); and long-term follow-up (SMD 0.03, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.13; 10 studies, 1908 participants). There was no difference in readiness to change (SMD 0.15, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.30; 5 studies, 988 participants; low-certainty evidence) and retention in treatment (SMD -0.04, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.14; 12 studies, 1945 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We downgraded the certainty of evidence due to inconsistency, study limitations, publication bias, and imprecision.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Motivational interviewing may reduce substance use compared with no intervention up to a short follow-up period. MI probably reduces substance use slightly compared with assessment and feedback over medium- and long-term periods. MI may make little to no difference to substance use compared to treatment as usual and another active intervention. It is unclear if MI has an effect on readiness to change and retention in treatment. The studies included in this review were heterogeneous in many respects, including the characteristics of participants, substance(s) used, and interventions. Given the widespread use of MI and the many studies examining MI, it is very important that counsellors adhere to and report quality conditions so that only studies in which the intervention implemented was actually MI are included in evidence syntheses and systematic reviews. Overall, we have moderate to no confidence in the evidence, which forces us to be careful about our conclusions. Consequently, future studies are likely to change the findings and conclusions of this review.

Avatar Intervention for Cannabis Use Disorder in Individuals with Severe Mental Disorders: A Pilot Study

Cannabis use disorder (CUD) is a complex issue, even more so when it is comorbid with a severe mental disorder (SMD). Available interventions are at best slightly effective, and their effects are not maintained over time. Therefore, the integration of virtual reality (VR) may increase efficacy; however, it has not yet been investigated in the treatment of CUD. A novel approach, avatar intervention for CUD, uses existing therapeutic techniques from other recommended therapies (e.g., cognitive behavioral methods, motivational interviewing) and allows participants to practice them in real-time. During immersive sessions, participants are invited to interact with an avatar representing a significant person related to their drug use. This pilot clinical trial aimed to evaluate the short-term efficacity of avatar intervention for CUD on 19 participants with a dual diagnosis of SMD and CUD. Results showed a significant moderate reduction in the quantity of cannabis use (Cohen's d = 0.611, p = 0.004), which was confirmed via urinary quantification of cannabis use. Overall, this unique intervention shows promising results. Longer-term results, as well as comparison with classical interventions in a larger sample, are warranted through a future single-blind randomized controlled trial.

Motivational interviewing to enhance psychosocial treatment attendance in people with SMI

BACKGROUND

While there is increasing support for the efficacy of psychosocial interventions for people with SMI, the real-world effectiveness of such treatments is diminished by lack of motivation for treatment, leading to poor treatment engagement/dropout. We sought to evaluate the efficacy of motivational interviewing (MI) in improving attendance in a full course of cognitive training, examine motivation level as a potential mechanism of action, and examine variables associated with initial engagement in the training.

METHODS

One hundred fourteen participants with SMI were randomized to MI or sham control interview (CI), both of which were followed by a 4-month active phase during which participants could attend up to 50 unpaid cognitive training sessions.

RESULTS

Fidelity to the MI intervention was high, and MI condition was associated with increases in perceived value of training tasks and, to a lesser extent, how enjoyable/interesting they were rated. Twenty-nine percent of the full sample did not attend any training sessions. In ITT analyses, there was no significant between-group impact of MI on treatment attendance, though one emerged when participants who did not attend any sessions were excluded. Treatment attendance was predicted by the level of motivation achieved after the MI/CI intervention. Those who attended at least one training session (regardless of randomization) were more likely to believe they had cognitive impairments, had higher IQ and had less severe general psychiatric symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

MI showed some promise and may be a worthwhile addition to more comprehensive, robust efforts to promote initial treatment engagement and subsequent adherence.

Dropout Rates in Psychosocial Interventions for People With Both Severe Mental Illness and Substance Misuse: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Over the years, many psychosocial interventions for individual having both a psychotic spectrum disorder and a substance use disorder diagnoses have been developed and studied. However, there is a high dropout rate among this clinical population.

OBJECTIVES

This meta-analysis aims to replicate a previous meta-analysis on the effects of psychosocial treatment for dual disorders, while including and determining the dropout rates in those type of interventions.

METHOD

Based on a Cochrane systematic review conducted in 2019, we conducted a meta-analysis including 40 randomized clinical trials on psychosocial treatment among persons suffering from schizophrenia spectrum disorder and substance use disorder.

RESULTS

A dropout rate of 27,2% was obtained. Stimulants use significantly affected dropout rates. Age, gender, diagnosis, alcohol and cannabis abuse, and duration of treatment did not affect dropout rates.

CONCLUSION

The 27,2% rate of dropout from psychosocial treatment highlights the need to engage participants having a dual diagnosis from the start by focusing on therapeutic alliance and motivation for treatment.

Genesis of change: Substance use treatment for forensic patients with mental health concerns

Substance use disorders are highly prevalent among forensic patients. They are associated with many challenges for patients with these problems, including their ability to rehabilitate and successfully move through secure forensic mental health services, as well as increasing risk for recidivism. Traditionally, forensic services have been more adept at focusing on and treating the primary mental health diagnosis alone and have been less likely to prioritise this co-occurring patient need. Opportunities exist to foster effective treatment strategies for substance use disorders, and past research has produced positive outcomes among forensic patients in studies in both Australia and the UK to navigate a new course for patients with these problems. By providing empirically validated, co-produced and culturally competent treatment responses, forensic patients living with substance use disorders will have the opportunity to significantly improve their wellbeing and progress through the system. They will also be more prepared and equipped to face challenges upon discharge into the community, including increased availability of alcohol and other drugs, social stigma and barriers to employment. Moreover, by prioritising effective substance use treatment programs during inpatient rehabilitation, services can reduce the levels of post-discharge recidivism.

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.

Randomized controlled trial of cognitive-motivational therapy program (PIPE) for the initial phase of schizophrenia: Maintenance of efficacy at 5-year follow up✰

AIM

The main goal of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a cognitive motivational treatment program.

METHOD

A randomized, controlled, single-blind clinical trial was carried out. A total of 104 patients were recruited to take part in the trial, of whom ultimately 62 patients were allocated into two groups and finished the study. An initial assessment was carried out before patients were randomly placed in one of two groups for the clinical trial: (a) PIPE program plus routine care; and (b) routine care only. Clinical assessments were performed at baseline at 6 months, 1 year and follow-ups, at 18 months and 5 years).

RESULTS

MANCOVA analysis of tests repeated 18 months after the start of the intervention detected significant differences between the two groups in terms of clinical variables, everyday functioning and relapses. These differences remained upon follow-up measurements taken five years after the start of the trial.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study offers scientific evidence for cognitive-motivational therapy's effectiveness as a treatment for clinical symptoms in the early stages of psychosis. PIPE intervention may contribute to long-term clinical improvement and stability.

Brief Report: Competency-Based Supervision in Motivational Interviewing for Advanced Psychology Trainees: Targeting an A Priori Benchmark

Motivational interviewing (MI) is an evidence based intervention with considerable support for promoting behavior change across a broad range of health and mental health issues. Despite its effectiveness, challenges associated with learning the approach may limit its full implementation in many clinical settings. The aim of the present study was to evaluate a supervised MI training practicum implemented within a doctoral internship/postdoctoral fellowship training Program. The goal of the practicum was to enable each trainee to achieve expert competence in MI. Participants were 29 psychology doctoral interns and 1 postdoctoral fellow who participated in the training as part of their internship or fellowship program. Training included an initial workshop followed by a supervised practicum during which progress towards an a priori established expert competence benchmark was tracked through the use of an established coding system. Results indicated that trainees were satisfied with the supervision received. Three trainees did not achieve the a priori benchmark due to schedule conflicts. The 27 trainees who achieved the benchmark required between 4 and 20 supervision sessions to do so (mean = 9.22, SD = 3.77). With the exception of reflective listening skill, prior training, baseline skill, and self-reported motivation were not associated with number of supervision sessions required to achieve the benchmark. Implications for training and dissemination of MI in clinical settings are discussed.

Improving treatment motivation in individuals with psychosis: Predictors of response to motivational enhancement

We sought to evaluate the influence of demographic, symptom, functional and cognitive factors on task-specific motivation, as well as improvement in task-specific motivation that occurs in response to motivational interviewing. In the absence of any intervention, better task-specific motivation was associated with higher perceived competence and lower symptomatology. Post-motivational enhancement improvement in motivation was predicted by fewer hospitalizations and better cognitive insight, with baseline symptomatology no longer predictive. Findings suggest motivational enhancement is likely to benefit individuals with diverse clinical presentations, though may be particularly well suited to those with lesser disease severity and better cognitive insight.

Effectiveness of motivational interviewing interventions on medication adherence in adults with chronic diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Medication adherence is frequently suboptimal in adults with chronic diseases, resulting in negative consequences. Motivational interviewing (MI) is a collaborative conversational style for strengthening a person's motivation and commitment to change. We aimed to assess whether MI interventions are effective to enhance medication adherence in adults with chronic diseases and to explore the effect of individual MI intervention characteristics.

Methods

We searched electronic databases and reference lists of relevant articles to find randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed MI intervention effectiveness on medication adherence in adults with chronic diseases. A random-effects model was used to estimate a pooled MI intervention effect size and its heterogeneity (I 2 ). We also explored the effects of individual MI characteristics on MI intervention effect size using a meta-regression with linear mixed model.

Results

: Nineteen RCTs were identified, and 16 were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled MI intervention effect size was 0.12 [95% confidence interval (CI) = (0.05, 0.20), I 2 = 1%]. Interventions that were based on MI only [β = 0.183, 95% CI = (0.004, 0.362)] or those in which interventionists were coached during intervention implementation [β = 0.465, 95% CI = (0.028, 0.902)] were the most effective. MI interventions that were delivered solely face to face were more effective than those that were delivered solely by phone [β = 0.270, 95% CI = (0.041, 0.498)].

Conclusions

This synthesis of RCTs suggests that MI interventions might be effective at enhancing of medication adherence in adults treated for chronic diseases. Further research is however warranted, as the observed intervention effect size was small.

The five-year costs and benefits of extended psychological and psychiatric assessment versus standard intake interview for women with comorbid substance use disorders treated in compulsory care in Sweden

BACKGROUND

Women with comorbid substance use disorders are an extremely vulnerable group having an increased relative risk of negative outcomes such as incarceration, morbidity and mortality. In Sweden, women with comorbid substance use disorders may be placed in compulsory care for substance abuse treatment. Clinical intake assessment procedures are a distinct aspect of clinical practice and are a foundation upon which client motivation and continued treatment occurs.

METHOD

The current study is a naturalistic quasi-experiment and aims to assess the five-year costs and benefits of a standard intake interview versus an extended psychological and psychiatric assessment for a group of chronic substance abusing women placed in compulsory care in Sweden between 1997 and 2000. Official register data on criminal activity, healthcare use, compulsory care stays and other services was retrieved and all resources used by study participants from date of index care episode was valued. In addition, the cost of providing the intake assessment was estimated.

RESULTS

Results show that the extended assessment resulted in higher net costs over five years of between 256,000 and 557,000 SEK per person for women placed in care via the Law on Compulsory Care for Substance Abusers (LVM). Higher assessment costs made up a portion of this cost. The majority of this cost (47-57%) falls on the local municipality (social welfare) and 11.6-13.7% falls on the individual patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Solid evidence supporting the clinical utility or incremental validity of assessment for improving treatment outcomes in this setting was not confirmed.

Motivational interviewing to enhance treatment attendance in mental health settings: A systematic review and meta-analysis

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Despite differences between samples, some literature reviews have suggested that MI is effective in enhancing treatment attendance for individuals with mental health issues. Little is known regarding the effects of MI as a pre-treatment on individuals who are not seeking treatment for mental health issues. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: This systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis demonstrates that MI is most beneficial for individuals who are not seeking mental health treatment. MI represents an opportunity for health promotion when patients are unmotivated but may otherwise be amenable to an intervention. MI is effective as a pre-treatment intervention to motivate individuals to attend further post-MI treatment and counselling. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: MI is a process and a useful tool for clinicians in all therapeutic interactions, to motivate their patients to seek further assistance for mental heath issues. Health promotion and encouragement to attend further treatment sessions can be facilitated through telephone contact.

ABSTRACT

Introduction The stages of change model suggests that individuals seeking treatment are in the "preparation" or the "action" stage of change, which is the desired outcome of successful Motivational Interviewing (MI) interventions. MI is known to enhance treatment attendance among individuals with mental health problems. Aim This study examined the published research on MI as a pre-treatment to enhance attendance among individuals treatment-seeking and non-treatment-seeking for mental health issues. Methods Fourteen randomized controlled trials were identified, and MI efficacy was examined dichotomously: attendance or non-attendance for post-MI therapy. Subgroup analysis investigated treatment-seeking and non-treatment-seeking groups. Results Despite wide variations in sample sizes, blinding and monitoring, intervention fidelity was absent in the majority of published studies. Meta-analysis revealed that MI pre-treatment improved attendance relative to comparison groups. Conclusions Individuals not seeking treatment for mental health issues benefited the most from MI. Despite differences in MI treatment intensity, short interventions were as effective as longer interventions, whereas two MI sessions for as little as 15 min were effective in enhancing treatment attendance. Implications for Practice Motivational interviewing is a useful tool for clinicians in all therapeutic interactions to help motivate patients to seek assistance for mental health issues.

Jail-to-community treatment continuum for adults with co-occurring substance use and mental disorders: study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Adults with co-occurring mental and substance use disorders (CODs) are overrepresented in jails. In-custody barriers to treatment, including a lack of evidence-based treatment options and the often short periods of incarceration, and limited communication between jails and community-based treatment agencies that can hinder immediate enrollment into community care once released have contributed to a cycle of limited treatment engagement, unaddressed criminogenic risks, and (re)arrest among this vulnerable and high-risk population. This paper describes a study that will develop research and communication protocols and adapt two evidence-based treatments, dual-diagnosis motivational interviewing (DDMI) and integrated group therapy (IGT), for delivery to adults with CODs across a jail-to-community treatment continuum.

METHODS/DESIGN

Adaptations to DDMI and IGT were guided by the Risk-Need-Responsivity model and the National Institute of Corrections' implementation competencies; the development of the implementation framework and communication protocols were guided by the Evidence-Based Interagency Implementation Model for community corrections and the Inter-organizational Relationship model, respectively. Implementation and evaluation of the protocols and adapted interventions will occur via an open trial and a pilot randomized trial. The clinical intervention consists of two in-jail DDMI sessions and 12 in-community IGT sessions. Twelve adults with CODs and four clinicians will participate in the open trial to evaluate the acceptability and feasibility of, and fidelity to, the interventions and research and communication protocols. The pilot controlled trial will be conducted with 60 inmates who will be randomized to either DDMI-IGT or treatment as usual. A baseline assessment will be conducted in jail, and four community-based assessments will be conducted during a 6-month follow-up period. Implementation, clinical, public health, and treatment preference outcomes will be evaluated.

DISCUSSION

Findings have the potential to improve both jail- and community-based treatment services for adults with CODs as well as inform methods for conducting rigorous pilot implementation and evaluation research in correctional settings and as inmates re-enter the community. Findings will contribute to a growing area of work focused on interrupting the cycle of limited treatment engagement, unaddressed criminogenic risks, and (re)arrest among adults with CODs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02214667 . Registered on 10 August 2014.

Motivation deficits and use of alcohol and illicit drugs among individuals with schizophrenia

This study examined the impact of substance use on intrinsic motivation and evaluated the association between intrinsic motivation and substance use recovery among individuals with schizophrenia. Alcohol and illicit drug use and intrinsic motivation were evaluated at baseline and 6-months for 1434 individuals with schizophrenia from the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) using self-rated substance use assessments and a derived motivation measure from the Heinrichs-Carpenter Quality of Life Scale. Results revealed patients had moderate motivation deficits overall and a considerable number were using alcohol or illicit drugs at baseline (n=576; 40.2%). Regression models at baseline showed patients with low levels of motivation had higher odds of substance use and those who were using substances had greater motivation deficits. At 6-months, substance using patients continued to demonstrate greater motivation deficits; however, those with high levels of motivation exhibited a greater reduction in their use of substances. Findings remained significant after adjusting for clinical confounds and were consistent across any substance, alcohol, and cannabis use. Our results emphasize concerns about substance use compounding motivation deficits in schizophrenia, and suggest that disentangling the motivation-substance use relationship in schizophrenia may facilitate efforts aimed at ameliorating these challenges and improving outcomes.

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.

Changes in cannabis use among psychotic clients without specialised substance use treatment

The need to address substance use among people with psychosis has been well established. However, treatment studies targeting substance use in this population have reported mixed results. Substance users with psychosis in no or minimal treatment control groups achieve similar reductions in substance use compared to those in more active substance use treatment, suggesting a role for natural recovery from substance use. This meta-analysis aims to quantify the amount of natural recovery from substance use within control groups of treatment studies containing samples of psychotic substance users, with a particular focus on changes in cannabis use. A systematic search was conducted to identify substance use treatment studies. Meta-analyses were performed to quantify reductions in the frequency of substance use in the past 30days. Significant but modest reductions (mean reduction of 0.3-0.4 SD across the time points) in the frequency of substance use were found at 6 to 24months follow up. The current study is the first to quantify changes in substance use in samples enrolled in no treatment or minimal treatment control conditions. These findings highlight the potential role of natural recovery from substance use among individuals with psychosis, although they do not rule out effects of regression to the mean. Additionally, the results provide a baseline from which to estimate likely changes or needed effects sizes in intervention studies. Future research is required to identify the processes underpinning these changes, in order to identify strategies that may better support self-management of substance use in people with psychosis.

Psychosocial Interventions in Reducing Cannabis Use in Early Phase Psychosis: A Canadian Survey of Treatments Offered

OBJECTIVE

Cannabis use in people with early phase psychosis (EPP) can have a significant impact on long-term outcomes. The purpose of this investigation was to describe current cannabis use treatment practices in English-speaking early intervention services (EISs) in Canada and determine if their services are informed by available evidence.

METHOD

Thirty-five Canadian English-speaking EISs for psychosis were approached to complete a survey through email, facsimile, or online in order to collect information regarding their current cannabis use treatment practices.

RESULTS

Data were acquired from 27 of the 35 (78%) programs approached. Only 12% of EISs offered formal services that targeted cannabis use, whereas the majority (63%) of EISs offered informal services for all substance use, not specifically cannabis. In programs with informal services, individual patient psychoeducation (86%) was slightly more common than individual motivational interviewing (MI) (76%) followed by group patient psychoeducation (52%) and information handouts (52%). Thirty-seven percent of EISs offered formal services for substance use, and compared to programs with informal services, more MI, cognitive-behavioural therapy, and family services were offered, with individual treatment modalities more common than groups. No EISs used contingency management, even though it has some preliminary evidence in chronic populations. Evidence-based service implementation barriers included appropriate training and administrative support.

CONCLUSIONS

While most English-speaking Canadian EIS programs offer individual MI and psychoeducation, which is in line with the available literature, there is room for improvement in cannabis treatment services based on current evidence for both people with EPP and their families.

A randomized clinical trial of Motivational Interviewing to reduce alcohol and drug use among patients with depression

OBJECTIVE

This study examined the efficacy of Motivational Interviewing (MI) to reduce hazardous drinking and drug use among adults in treatment for depression.

METHOD

Randomized controlled trial based in a large outpatient psychiatry program in an integrated health care system in Northern California. The sample consisted of 307 participants ages 18 and over who reported hazardous drinking, drug use (primarily cannabis) or misuse of prescription drugs in the prior 30 days, and who scored ≥5 on the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). Participants were randomized to receive either 3 sessions of MI (1 in person and 2 by phone) or printed literature about alcohol and drug use risks (control), as an adjunct to usual outpatient depression care. Measures included alcohol and drug use in the prior 30 days and PHQ-9 depression symptoms. Participants completed baseline in-person interviews and telephone follow-up interviews at 3 and 6 months (96 and 98% of the baseline sample, respectively). Electronic health records were used to measure usual care.

RESULTS

At 6 months, MI was more effective than control in reducing rate of cannabis use (p = .037); and hazardous drinking (≥4 drinks in a day for women, ≥5 drinks in a day for men; p = .060). In logistic regression, assignment to MI predicted lower cannabis use at 6 months (p = .016) after controlling for covariates. Depression improved in both conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

MI can be an effective intervention for cannabis use and hazardous drinking among patients with depression. (PsycINFO Database Record

Motivational Interviewing to Increase Cognitive Rehabilitation Adherence in Schizophrenia

Adherence to treatment in psychiatric populations is notoriously low. In this randomized, controlled, proof-of-concept study, we sought to examine whether motivational interviewing (MI) could be used to enhance motivation for, adherence to, and benefit obtained from cognitive rehabilitation. Dual diagnosis MI, developed specifically for individuals with psychotic symptoms and disorganization, was further adapted to focus on cognitive impairments and their impact. Sixty-four outpatients diagnosed with schizophrenia spectrum disorders completed baseline assessments and were randomized to receive either the 2-session MI focused on cognitive functioning or a 2-session sham control interview focused on assessment and feedback about preferred learning styles. Next, all participants were given 4 weeks during which they could attend up to 10 sessions of a computer-based math training program, which served as a brief analog for a full course of cognitive rehabilitation. As hypothesized, MI condition was associated with greater increases in task-specific motivation along with greater training program session attendance. Moreover, postinterview motivation level predicted session attendance. There were no significant differences in improvement on a measure of cognitive training content, which may have been due to the abbreviated nature of the training. While the literature on the efficacy of MI for individuals with psychosis has been mixed, we speculate that our positive findings may have been influenced by the adaptations made to MI as well as the focus on a nonpharmacological intervention.

The wellness incentives and navigation project: design and methods

Background

About 35 % of non-elderly U.S. adult Medicaid enrollees have a behavioral health condition, such as anxiety, mood disorders, substance use disorders, and/or serious mental illness. Individuals with serious mental illness, in particular, have mortality rates that are 2 to 3 times higher as the general population, which are due to multiple factors including inactivity, poor nutrition, and tobacco use. 61 % of Medicaid beneficiaries with behavioral health conditions also have multiple other co-occurring chronic physical health conditions, which further contributes to morbidity and mortality. The Wellness Incentives and Navigation (WIN) project is one of 10 projects under the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services “Medicaid Incentives for the Prevention of Chronic Diseases” Initiative, to “test the effectiveness of providing incentives directly to Medicaid beneficiaries of all ages who participate in prevention programs, and change their health risks and outcomes by adopting healthy behaviors.”

Methods/Design

WIN is a three-year randomized pragmatic clinical trial designed to examine the comparative effectiveness of the combined use of personal navigators, motivational interviewing, and a flexible wellness account on cardiovascular risk reduction among individuals in Medicaid with co-occurring physical and mental health conditions or serious mental illness alone relative to the usual care provided within Medicaid Managed Care. 1250 individuals, identified through Medicaid claims data, were recruited and randomly assigned to an intervention group or control group with outcomes tracked annually. A comparison group was also recruited to help assess the study’s internal validity.

Discussion

The primary outcomes are physical and mental health related quality-of-life as measured by the SF-12, and BMI, blood pressure, LDL-C, and Hba1c results for those who are diabetic measured clinically. The purpose of this paper is to present the unique design of the WIN trial prior to results becoming available in hopes of assisting other researchers in conducting community-based randomized pragmatic trials. Outcomes will be assessed through the linkage of patient reported outcomes, health care claims, and electronic health record data.

Trial Registration

NCT02440906

Cannabis psychosis, gender matters

Purpose

– The purpose of this paper is to draw together key literature and analyses of data on admissions for cannabis psychosis in National Health Service hospitals in England (extracted from Hospital Episode Statistics (HES)) to highlight what is known about gender differences in cannabis psychosis and point towards suggestions for improving gender-sensitive treatment and future research.

Design/methodology/approach

– Analysis of British Crime Survey data and HES data were used in combination with data from previously published epidemiological studies to compare gender differences.

Findings

– Male cannabis users outnumber female users by 2:1, a similar gender ratio is found for those admitted to hospital with a diagnosis of schizophrenia or psychosis. However this ratio increases significantly for those admitted to hospital with a diagnosis of cannabis psychosis, with males outnumbering females by 4:1.

Research limitations/implications

– Consistent patterns in gender ratios for people admitted to hospital with cannabis psychosis over a period of 11 years are reported, it is not clear why this gender difference persists but it warrants further investigation which would be aided by improved gender recording at a systemic level.

Practical implications

– This review brings into focus the marked gender differences in cannabis psychosis. Attending to gender is important for research and treatment with the aim of improving understanding and providing gender-sensitive services.

Originality/value

– This paper adds to the literature on gender differences in cannabis psychosis.

A randomized trial for hazardous drinking and smoking cessation for callers to a quitline

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated whether tobacco quitline telephone coaches can be trained to counsel hazardous-drinking smokers to improve smoking cessation success and to limit or abstain from alcohol use.

METHOD

Smokers (N = 1,948) who called the New York State Smokers' Quitline and reported hazardous drinking (exceeding sex-specific weekly limits [14 drinks for men, 7 drinks for women] or meeting/exceeding daily drinking limits [5 drinks for men, 4 drinks for women] at least once in the past year) were randomized to receive either brief motivational counseling to limit or abstain from alcohol plus an alcohol reduction booklet added to standard care (Alcohol + Tobacco Counseling; ATC), or only smoking cessation counseling plus a smoking cessation booklet added to standard care (Tobacco-Only Counseling; TOC).

RESULTS

Acceptable coach adherence was achieved. The intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis showed that ATC was associated with a significantly higher rate of smoking abstinence at 7-month follow-up (13.5%) compared with TOC (10.3%; p = .03). The respondent analysis (ATC= 26.2%; TOC = 20.4%) paralleled the ITT findings. When controlling for treatment condition, participants who did not report any heavy drinking were significantly more likely to quit smoking than those who reported any heavy drinking (OR = 1.87, 95% CI [1.29, 2.71]; p = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

A brief alcohol intervention plus standard care via a telephone quitline resulted in significantly higher smoking cessation rates for hazardous-drinking callers. Given that quitline coaches were trained to provide the intervention with acceptable adherence, the potential to extend this intervention for wide-scale implementation and impact is promising.

Cannabis and schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia is a mental illness causing disordered beliefs, ideas and sensations. Many people with schizophrenia smoke cannabis, and it is unclear why a large proportion do so and if the effects are harmful or beneficial. It is also unclear what the best method is to allow people with schizophrenia to alter their cannabis intake.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of specific psychological treatments for cannabis reduction in people with schizophrenia.To assess the effects of antipsychotics for cannabis reduction in people with schizophrenia.To assess the effects of cannabinoids (cannabis related chemical compounds derived from cannabis or manufactured) for symptom reduction in people with schizophrenia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register, 12 August 2013, which is based on regular searches of BIOSIS, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PUBMED and PsycINFO.We searched all references of articles selected for inclusion for further relevant trials. We contacted the first author of included studies for unpublished trials or data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials involving cannabinoids and schizophrenia/schizophrenia-like illnesses, which assessed:1) treatments to reduce cannabis use in people with schizophrenia;2) the effects of cannabinoids on people with schizophrenia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently inspected citations, selected papers and then re-inspected the studies if there were discrepancies, and extracted data. For dichotomous data we calculated risk ratios (RR) and for continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD), both with 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis, based on a fixed-effect model. We excluded data if loss to follow-up was greater than 50%. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and used GRADE to rate the quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified eight randomised trials, involving 530 participants, which met our selection criteria.For the cannabis reduction studies no one treatment showed superiority for reduction in cannabis use. Overall, data were poorly reported for many outcomes of interest. Our main outcomes of interest were medium-term data for cannabis use, global state, mental state, global functioning, adverse events, leaving the study early and satisfaction with treatment. 1. Reduction in cannabis use: adjunct psychological therapies (specifically about cannabis and psychosis) versus treatment as usualResults from one small study showed people receiving adjunct psychological therapies specifically about cannabis and psychosis were no more likely to reduce their intake than those receiving treatment as usual (n = 54, 1 RCT, MD -0.10, 95% CI -2.44 to 2.24, moderate quality evidence). Results for other main outcomes at medium term were also equivocal. No difference in mental state measured on the PANSS positive were observed between groups (n = 62, 1 RCT, MD -0.30 95% CI -2.55 to 1.95, moderate quality evidence). Nor for the outcome of general functioning measured using the World Health Organization Quality of Life BREF (n = 49, 1 RCT, MD 0.90 95% CI -1.15 to 2.95, moderate quality evidence). No data were reported for the other main outcomes of interest 2. Reduction in cannabis use: adjunct psychological therapy (specifically about cannabis and psychosis) versus adjunct non-specific psychoeducation One study compared specific psychological therapy aimed at cannabis reduction with general psychological therapy. At three-month follow-up, the use of cannabis in the previous four weeks was similar between treatment groups (n = 47, 1 RCT, RR 1.04 95% CI 0.62 to 1.74, moderate quality evidence). Again, at a medium-term follow-up, the average mental state scores from the Brief Pscychiatric Rating Scale-Expanded were similar between groups (n = 47, 1 RCT, MD 3.60 95% CI - 5.61 to 12.81, moderate quality evidence). No data were reported for the other main outcomes of interest: global state, general functioning, adverse events, leaving the study early and satisfaction with treatment. 3. Reduction in cannabis use: antipsychotic versus antipsychotic In a small trial comparing effectiveness of olanzapine versus risperidone for cannabis reduction, there was no difference between groups at medium-term follow-up (n = 16, 1 RCT, RR 1.80 95% CI 0.52 to 6.22, moderate quality evidence). The number of participants leaving the study early at medium term was also similar (n = 28, 1 RCT, RR 0.50 95% CI 0.19 to 1.29, moderate quality evidence). Mental state data were reported, however they were reported within the short term and no difference was observed. No data were reported for global state, general functioning, and satisfaction with treatment.With regards to adverse effects data, no study reported medium-term data. Short-term data were presented but overall, no real differences between treatment groups were observed for adverse effects. 4. Cannabinoid as treatment: cannabidiol versus amisulprideAgain, no data were reported for any of the main outcomes of interest at medium term. There were short-term data reported for mental state using the BPRS and PANSS, no overall differences in mental state were observed between treatment groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Results are limited and inconclusive due to the small number and size of randomised controlled trials available and quality of data reporting within these trials. More research is needed to a) explore the effects of adjunct psychological therapy that is specifically about cannabis and psychosis as currently there is no evidence for any novel intervention being better than standard treatment,for those that use cannabis and have schizophrenia b) decide the most effective drug treatment in treating those that use cannabis and have schizophrenia, and c) assess the effectiveness of cannabidiol in treating schizophrenia. Currently evidence is insufficient to show cannabidiol has an antipsychotic effect.

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.

Specialized psychosocial treatment plus treatment as usual (TAU) versus TAU for patients with cannabis use disorder and psychosis: the CapOpus randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Cannabis abuse in psychotic patients is associated with rehospitalizations, reduced adherence and increased symptom severity. Previous psychosocial interventions have been ineffective in cannabis use, possibly because of low sample sizes and short interventions. We investigated whether adding CapOpus to treatment as usual (TAU) reduces cannabis use in patients with cannabis use disorder and psychosis. Method A total of 103 patients with psychosis and cannabis use disorder were centrally randomized to 6 months of CapOpus plus TAU (n = 52) or TAU (n = 51). CapOpus consisted mainly of motivational interviewing and cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT). TAU was targeted primarily at the psychotic disorder. The primary outcome was self-reported days with cannabis use in the preceding month.

RESULTS

Pre-randomization cannabis use frequency was 14.9 [95% confidence interval (CI) 12.7-17.1] days/month. Post-treatment, the ratio of days/month with cannabis use in CapOpus versus TAU was 0.76 (95% CI 0.38-1.50) (p = 0.42), and 0.80 (95% CI 0.21-3.10) (p = 0.75) at the 4-month follow-up. From 46.4 (95% CI 36.4-56.3) monthly joints pre-randomization, consumption fell to 27.3 (95% CI 12.6-41.9) joints in CapOpus and 48.2 (95% CI 31.8-64.6) in TAU (p = 0.06). Follow-up amounts were 28.4 (95% CI 13.5-43.2) and 41.6 (95% CI 25.2-58.0) joints (p = 0.23). Several subgroup analyses suggested benefits of CapOpus.

CONCLUSIONS

CapOpus did not reduce the frequency, but possibly the amount, of cannabis use. This is similar to the findings of previous trials in this population. Implementation of CapOpus-type interventions is thus not warranted at present but subgroup analyses call for further trials.

The effects of motivational interviewing on patients with comorbid substance use admitted to a psychiatric emergency unit - a randomised controlled trial with two year follow-up

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of substance use in people acutely admitted to in-patient psychiatric wards is high and the patients` duration of stay is limited. Motivational interviewing is a method with evidence based effect in short interventions. The aims of the present study were to compare the effects of 2 sessions of motivational interviewing and treatment as usual (intervention group) with treatment as usual only (control group) on adult patients with comorbid substance use admitted to a psychiatric in-patient emergency unit.

METHODS

This was an open randomised controlled trial including 135 patients where substance use influenced the admittance. After admission and assessments, the patients were allocated to the intervention group (n = 67) or the control group (n = 68). The primary outcome was self-reported days per month of substance use during the last 3 months at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after inclusion. Data was analysed with a multilevel linear repeated measures regression model.

RESULTS

Both groups reduced substance use during the first 12 months with no substantial difference between the 2 groups. At 2 year follow-up, the control group had increased their substance use with 2.4 days (95% confidence interval (CI) -1.5 to 6.3), whereas the intervention group had reduced their monthly substance use with 4.9 days (95% CI 1.2 to 8.6) compared to baseline. The 2 year net difference was 7.3 days of substance use per month (95% CI 1.9 to 12.6, p < 0.01) in favour of the intervention group.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study suggests that 2 sessions of motivational interviewing to patients with comorbid substance use admitted to a psychiatric emergency unit reduce substance use frequency substantially at 2 year follow-up.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00184223.

Motivational interviewing to reduce hazardous drinking and drug use among depression patients

This randomized study examined the efficacy of motivational interviewing (MI) to reduce substance use among adults with depression in outpatient psychiatry. The sample consisted of 104 participants ages 18 and over who reported hazardous drinking (three drinks or more per occasion), illegal drug use or misuse of prescription drugs in the prior 30 days, and who scored ≥ 15 on the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II). Participants were randomized to receive either three sessions of MI or printed literature about alcohol and drug use risks, as an adjunct to usual outpatient depression care, and completed telephone follow-up interviews at 3 and 6 months (93 and 99% of the baseline sample, respectively). Among participants reporting any hazardous drinking at baseline (n=73), MI-treated participants were less likely than controls to report hazardous drinking at 3 months (60.0 vs. 81.8%, p=.043). MI is a promising intervention to reduce hazardous drinking among depression patients.

Self-reported alcohol and drug use six months after brief intervention: do changes in reported use vary by mental-health status?

Background

Although brief intervention (BI) for alcohol and other drug problems has been associated with subsequent decreased levels of self-reported substance use, there is little information in the extant literature as to whether individuals with co-occurring hazardous substance use and mental illness would benefit from BI to the same extent as those without mental illness. This is an important question, as mental illness is estimated to co-occur in 37% of individuals with an alcohol use disorder and in more than 50% of individuals with a drug use disorder. The goal of this study was to explore differences in self-reported alcohol and/or drug use in patients with and without mental illness diagnoses six months after receiving BI in a hospital emergency department (ED).

Methods

This study took advantage of a naturalistic situation where a screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) program had been implemented in nine large EDs in the US state of Washington as part of a national SBIRT initiative. A subset of patients who received BI was interviewed six months later about current alcohol and drug use. Linear regression was used to assess whether change in substance use measures differed among patients with a mental illness diagnosis compared with those without. Data were analyzed for both a statewide (n = 828) and single-hospital (n = 536) sample.

Results

No significant differences were found between mentally ill and non-mentally ill subgroups in either sample with regard to self-reported hazardous substance use at six-month follow-up.

Conclusion

These results suggest that BI may not have a differing impact based on the presence of a mental illness diagnosis. Given the high prevalence of mental illness among individuals with alcohol and other drug problems, this finding may have important public health implications.

A systematic review of psychological interventions for excessive alcohol consumption among people with psychotic disorders

OBJECTIVE

Excessive alcohol consumption is common among people with psychotic disorders. While there is an extensive literature on the efficacy of psychological treatments for excessive drinking, few studies have examined interventions addressing this issue among people with psychotic disorders.

METHOD

Systematic searches in PubMed and PsycINFO were conducted to identify randomized controlled trials comparing manual-guided psychological interventions for excessive alcohol consumption among individuals with psychotic disorders. Of the 429 articles identified, seven met inclusion criteria. Data were extracted from each study regarding study sample characteristics, design, results, clinical significance of alcohol consumption results, and methodological limitations.

RESULTS

Assessment interviews, brief motivational interventions, and lengthier cognitive behavior therapy have been associated with reductions in alcohol consumption among people with psychosis. While brief interventions (i.e. 1-2 sessions) were generally as effective as longer duration psychological interventions (i.e. 10 sessions) for reducing alcohol consumption, longer interventions provided additional benefits for depression, functioning, and other alcohol outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Excessive alcohol consumption among people with psychotic disorders is responsive to psychological interventions. It is imperative that such approaches are integrated within standard care for people with psychosis.

Sequential behavioral treatment of smoking and weight control in bipolar disorder

People with severe mental illnesses like schizophrenia and bipolar disorder (BPAD) live significantly shorter lives than people in the general population and most commonly die of cardiovascular disease (CVD). CVD risk behaviors such as smoking are not routinely assessed or assertively treated among people with a severe mental illness. This article provides an illustrative case example of a woman with BPAD who is motivated to quit smoking, despite concerns about weight gain and relapse to depression. It outlines key considerations and describes the patient's experience of participating in a behavioral intervention focussing first on smoking, then diet and physical activity. Clinical challenges encountered during treatment are discussed in the context of relevant literature. These include motivational issues, relapse to depression, medication interactions, weight gain, addressing multiple health behavior change, focussing on a behavioral rather than cognitive approach, collaborating with other health care providers, and gender issues.

Extending motivational interviewing to the treatment of major mental health problems: current directions and evidence

Motivational interviewing (MI) was originally developed for the treatment of substance abuse but is rapidly expanding to other major mental health populations beyond addictions. This brief review considers the use of MI and related motivational enhancement therapies (METs) in the treatment of anxiety, depression, and eating disorders, and concurrent psychosis and substance use disorders. MI-MET has been added and (or) integrated into treatment for these problems in a wide variety of ways, most commonly as a pretreatment to other therapies (psychosocial treatments and pharmacotherapy) or integrated into standard assessment procedures. In each problem domain, the bulk of the current evidence supports the value of adding MI to existing therapies in increasing engagement with treatment and in improving clinical outcomes. This is particularly encouraging in that many of the populations included in these investigations represent severe and treatment-recalcitrant populations. However, research on the application of MI to other major mental health problems beyond addictions is in the early stages, with existing studies having numerous limitations (for example, small uncontrolled studies or lack of adequate control groups, and failure to establish both MI treatment integrity and the unique contribution of MI in integrated treatments). In short, the substantial body of promising preliminary findings strongly support the continued investigation of MI and related methods for these populations in well-designed clinical trials that examine not only the additive value of MI but also mechanisms underlying these effects and individual differences (moderators) indicating the need for MI.

Integrating treatment for mental and physical disorders and substance misuse in Indigenous primary care settings

OBJECTIVE

Australian Indigenous peoples in remote and rural settings continue to have limited access to treatment for mental illness. Comorbid disorders complicate presentations in primary care where Indigenous youths and perinatal women are at particular risk. Despite this high comorbidity there are few examples of successful models of integrated treatment. This paper outlines these challenges and provides recommendations for practice that derive from recent developments in the Northern Territory.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a strong need to develop evidence for the effectiveness of integrated and culturally informed individual and service level interventions. We describe the Best practice in Early intervention Assessment and Treatment of depression and substance misuse study which seeks to address this need.

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.

Motivational interview improves treatment entry in homeless veterans

Motivational Interviewing (MI) has successfully been used to facilitate entry and compliance in drug and alcohol treatment programs. Some questions have been raised as to the effectiveness of MI in severely distressed populations. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of MI in a population of homeless, unemployed, and substance dependent veterans who are being wait-listed for entry into a residential treatment program. Seventy-five veterans placed on a wait-list were randomized to receive a single MI or standard (Std) intake interview. Outcomes assessed were entry, and length of stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes assessed included program completion and rates of graduation. Readiness to change and self-efficacy were assessed before and after the interview. Significantly more participants entered the program in the MI group (95%) than in the Std group (71%). Although those in the MI group remained in the program longer, and had higher program completion and graduation rates, these differences were not statistically significant. No significant between-group or within-group differences were found in readiness or self-efficacy. This study demonstrates that a single, easily administered intervention can increase program entry. Also based on the study findings, further research into the question of whether MI can increase program retention, in a severely distressed population, is warranted.

Behavioral vaccines and evidence-based kernels: nonpharmaceutical approaches for the prevention of mental, emotional, and behavioral disorders

In the United States the rates for some mental, emotional, and behavioral problems (MEBs) have objectively increased over the past 20 to 50 years. The attributes of a public health approach to the treatment of MEBs are defined in this article. Multiple examples of how public health approaches might reduce or prevent MEBs using low-cost evidence-based kernels, which are fundamental units of behavior, are discussed. Such kernels can be used repeatedly, which then act as "behavioral vaccines" to reduce morbidity or mortality and/or improve human wellbeing. The author calls for 6 key policy actions to improve MEBs in young people.

Predicting post-treatment-initiation alcohol use among patients with severe mental illness and alcohol use disorders

Few investigators studying alcohol abuse among individuals with a severe mental illness (SMI) have examined predictors of posttreatment alcohol outcomes. In the present study, a multivariate approach based on a theoretical model was used to study the relationship between psychosocial factors and post-treatment-initiation alcohol use. Predictors of alcohol use outcomes were examined in 278 individuals diagnosed with a current schizophrenia-spectrum or bipolar disorder and an alcohol use disorder (AUD). At 6-months follow-up, 144 of 228 available participants (63%) had good clinical outcomes. The results of structural equation modeling indicated that type of pretreatment residential setting was directly related to treatment, with participants who lived in supervised settings (41%) reporting significantly more days of treatment (beta = .34, p < .001). In addition, participants with more psychiatric symptoms, as assessed with the Brief Symptom Inventory and Structured Clinical Interview for the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, reported significantly fewer treatment days (beta = -.20, p < .001). Number of days that participants attended treatment was indirectly associated with alcohol use outcomes and was mediated by use of alcohol-specific coping skills, such that more frequent use of such skills was associated with less post-treatment-initiation alcohol use (beta = -.34, p < .001). This study emphasizes the favorable prognosis for alcohol outcomes among treated individuals with SMI and AUD and the importance of psychosocial interventions, particularly those that result in better alcohol-specific coping skills.

Randomized trial: Quitline specialist training in gain-framed vs standard-care messages for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Smoking accounts for a large proportion of cancer-related mortality, creating a need for better smoking cessation efforts. We investigated whether gain-framed messages (ie, presenting benefits of quitting) will be a more persuasive method to encourage smoking cessation than standard-care messages (ie, presenting both costs of smoking [loss-framed] and benefits of quitting).

METHODS

Twenty-eight specialists working at the New York State Smokers' Quitline (a free telephone-based smoking cessation service) were randomly assigned to provide gain-framed or standard-care counseling and print materials. Smokers (n = 2032) who called the New York State Smokers' Quitline between March 10, 2008, and June 13, 2008, were exposed to either gain-framed (n = 810) or standard-care (n = 1222) messages, and all medically eligible callers received nicotine replacement therapy. A subset of 400 call recordings was coded to assess treatment fidelity. All treated smokers were contacted for 2-week and 3-month follow-up interviews. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

Specialists providing gain-framed counseling used gain-framed statements statistically significantly more frequently than those providing standard-care counseling as assessed with frequency ratings for the two types of gain-framed statements, achieving benefits and avoiding negative consequences (for achieving benefits, gain-framed mean frequency rating = 3.9 vs standard-care mean frequency rating = 1.4; mean difference = -2.5; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -2.8 to -2.3; P < .001; for avoiding negative consequences, gain-framed mean frequency rating = 1.5 vs standard-card mean frequency rating = 1.0; mean difference = -0.5; 95% CI = -0.6 to -0.3; P < .001). Gain-framed counseling was associated with a statistically significantly higher rate of abstinence at the 2-week follow-up (ie, 99 [23.3%] of the 424 in the gain-framed group vs 76 [12.6%] of the 603 in the standard-care group, P < .001) but not at the 3-month follow-up (ie, 148 [28.4%] of the 522 in the gain-framed group vs 202 [26.6%] of the 760 in the standard-care group, P = .48).

CONCLUSIONS

Quitline specialists can be trained to provide gain-framed counseling with good fidelity. Also, gain-framed messages appear to be somewhat more persuasive than standard-care messages in promoting early success in smoking cessation.

The 2009 schizophrenia PORT psychosocial treatment recommendations and summary statements

The Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team (PORT) psychosocial treatment recommendations provide a comprehensive summary of current evidence-based psychosocial treatment interventions for persons with schizophrenia. There have been 2 previous sets of psychosocial treatment recommendations (Lehman AF, Steinwachs DM. Translating research into practice: the Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team (PORT) treatment recommendations. Schizophr Bull. 1998;24:1-10 and Lehman AF, Kreyenbuhl J, Buchanan RW, et al. The Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team (PORT): updated treatment recommendations 2003. Schizophr Bull. 2004;30:193-217). This article reports the third set of PORT recommendations that includes updated reviews in 7 areas as well as adding 5 new areas of review. Members of the psychosocial Evidence Review Group conducted reviews of the literature in each intervention area and drafted the recommendation or summary statement with supporting discussion. A Psychosocial Advisory Committee was consulted in all aspects of the review, and an expert panel commented on draft recommendations and summary statements. Our review process produced 8 treatment recommendations in the following areas: assertive community treatment, supported employment, cognitive behavioral therapy, family-based services, token economy, skills training, psychosocial interventions for alcohol and substance use disorders, and psychosocial interventions for weight management. Reviews of treatments focused on medication adherence, cognitive remediation, psychosocial treatments for recent onset schizophrenia, and peer support and peer-delivered services indicated that none of these treatment areas yet have enough evidence to merit a treatment recommendation, though each is an emerging area of interest. This update of PORT psychosocial treatment recommendations underscores both the expansion of knowledge regarding psychosocial treatments for persons with schizophrenia at the same time as the limitations in their implementation in clinical practice settings.

Secondary prevention of hazardous alcohol consumption in psychiatric out-patients: a randomised controlled study

BACKGROUND

Hazardous alcohol use is associated with an increased risk for development of a substance use disorder, leading to negative outcomes in psychiatric patients.

AIMS

In order to investigate whether psychiatric outpatients' hazardous alcohol consumption could be reduced by way of a brief intervention by telephone.

METHOD

Non-psychotic psychiatric outpatients, n = 1,670, completed a self-rating form concerning alcohol habits (AUDIT). Participants with scores indicating risk consumption (n = 344) were randomised to intervention (immediate advice) or control (advice after 6 months).

RESULTS

Hazardous alcohol habits occurred among 19% of the women and 24% of the men. In the intervention group, half of the patients reduced their alcohol consumption to non-hazardous levels at 6-month follow-up (ITT analysis). In women, 41.5% in the intervention group had no hazardous consumption at follow-up compared to 24.7% in the control group (P = 0.003), corresponding figure for men was 49.1 and 34.0%.

CONCLUSION

Brief intervention seems to be effective to reduce hazardous alcohol consumption in psychiatric outpatients.

Reprint of "Treatment of cannabis use disorders in people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders--a systematic review"

BACKGROUND

Cannabis use disorders (CUD) are prevalent among people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD), with a range of detrimental effects, e.g. reduced compliance to medication and psychosocial interventions, and increased level of psychotic-dimension symptoms. The aim of this study was to review literature on treatments of CUD in SSD-patients.

METHODS

PubMed, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched.

RESULTS

41 articles were selected, 11 treating cannabis as a separate outcome. Contingency management was only effective while active. Pharmacological interventions appeared effective, but lacked randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Psychosocial interventions, e.g. motivational interviewing and cognitive behavior therapy (CBT), were ineffective in most studies with cannabis as a separate outcome, but effective in studies that grouped cannabis together with other substance use disorders.

CONCLUSIONS

Insufficient evidence exists on treating this form of dual-diagnosis patients. Studies grouping several types of substances as a single outcome may overlook differential effects. Future RCTs should investigate combinations of psychosocial, pharmacological, and contingency management.

Treatment of cannabis use disorders in people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders - a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Cannabis use disorders (CUD) are prevalent among people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD), with a range of detrimental effects, e.g. reduced compliance to medication and psychosocial interventions, and increased level of psychotic-dimension symptoms. The aim of this study was to review literature on treatments of CUD in SSD-patients.

METHODS

PubMed, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched.

RESULTS

41 articles were selected, 11 treating cannabis as a separate outcome. Contingency management was only effective while active. Pharmacological interventions appeared effective, but lacked randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Psychosocial interventions, e.g. motivational interviewing and cognitive behavior therapy (CBT), were ineffective in most studies with cannabis as a separate outcome, but effective in studies that grouped cannabis together with other substance use disorders.

CONCLUSIONS

Insufficient evidence exists on treating this form of dual-diagnosis patients. Studies grouping several types of substances as a single outcome may overlook differential effects. Future RCTs should investigate combinations of psychosocial, pharmacological, and contingency management.

Reframing the dilemma of poor attendance at cardiac rehabilitation: an exploration of ambivalence and the decisional balance

AIM

To discuss the problem of poor attendance at cardiac rehabilitation from the alternative perspective of patient ambivalence.

BACKGROUND

Evidence supports the benefits of cardiac rehabilitation as a means for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease, yet current literature continues to document poor attendance at these programmes. Whilst extrinsic factors, such as transportation and lack of physician support have been identified as barriers, patients who choose not to attend these programmes are often described as lacking motivation or being non-compliant. However, it is possible that non-attendance is the result of ambivalence - the experience of simultaneously wanting to and yet not wanting to, or the 'I want to, but I don't want to' dilemma.

DESIGN

Discussion paper.

METHOD

This discussion paper draws on the literature of ambivalence and decision-making theory to reframe the issue of poor attendance at cardiac rehabilitation.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper has demonstrated that the problem of poor attendance may be explained from the perspective of patient ambivalence and that using strategies such as the decisional balance may assist these individuals in exploring their ambivalence to engage in secondary prevention programmes.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Understanding the dynamics of ambivalence provides an alternative to thinking of patients as lacking motivation, being non-compliant, or even resistant. Helping patients to explore and resolve their ambivalence may be all that is needed to help them make a decision and move forward.