1
|
Cohen M, Roe D, Savir T, Baumel A. Blended care in psychosis - A systematic review. Schizophr Res 2024; 267:381-391. [PMID: 38636358 DOI: 10.1016/j.schres.2024.03.041] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2024] [Revised: 03/25/2024] [Accepted: 03/28/2024] [Indexed: 04/20/2024]
Abstract
Blended-care, a psychosocial intervention combining traditional, face-to-face therapy with digital mental health tools, has shown potential for improving therapeutic processes, fostering patient engagement, and augmenting clinical outcomes. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the development and effectiveness of blended-care interventions tailored for adults diagnosed with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders or other conditions with psychotic features. Our search strategy spanned three electronic databases (PsycINFO, Web of Science, and PubMed) in accordance with the reporting guidelines outlined by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. We identified 11 papers, each examining the use of one of eight distinct blended-care interventions. Significantly, the majority of these papers (10/11, 91 %) examined these interventions exclusively within controlled research environments, demonstrating both acceptability and favourable impacts on symptomatology and recovery (e.g., 0.22 ≤ Cohen's ds ≤ 1.00). Only one intervention was examined in research settings and real-world conditions, and the shift resulted in low real-world uptake (e.g., only 50 % of practitioners were able to engage at least one of their clients with the intervention) and an inability to reproduce positive changes in clinical outcomes. Additional research is needed to determine the viability of successfully developing and implementing blended-care interventions for psychosis in real-world conditions. An exploration of the developmental processes that could facilitate the transition from research settings to routine clinical practice is vital.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mayan Cohen
- Department of Community Mental Health, University of Haifa, 119 Abba Khoushy Ave., Haifa, Israel.
| | - David Roe
- Department of Community Mental Health, University of Haifa, 119 Abba Khoushy Ave., Haifa, Israel
| | - Tomer Savir
- Department of Community Mental Health, University of Haifa, 119 Abba Khoushy Ave., Haifa, Israel
| | - Amit Baumel
- Department of Community Mental Health, University of Haifa, 119 Abba Khoushy Ave., Haifa, Israel
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Allan S, Ward T, Eisner E, Bell IH, Cella M, Chaudhry IB, Torous J, Kiran T, Kabir T, Priyam A, Richardson C, Reininghaus U, Schick A, Schwannauer M, Syrett S, Zhang X, Bucci S. Adverse Events Reporting in Digital Interventions Evaluations for Psychosis: A Systematic Literature Search and Individual Level Content Analysis of Adverse Event Reports. Schizophr Bull 2024:sbae031. [PMID: 38581410 DOI: 10.1093/schbul/sbae031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/08/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Digital health interventions (DHIs) have significant potential to upscale treatment access to people experiencing psychosis but raise questions around patient safety. Adverse event (AE) monitoring is used to identify, record, and manage safety issues in clinical trials, but little is known about the specific content and context contained within extant AE reports. This study aimed to assess current AE reporting in DHIs. STUDY DESIGN A systematic literature search was conducted by the iCharts network (representing academic, clinical, and experts by experience) to identify trials of DHIs in psychosis. Authors were invited to share AE reports recorded in their trials. A content analysis was conducted on the shared reports. STUDY RESULTS We identified 593 AE reports from 18 DHI evaluations, yielding 19 codes. Only 29 AEs (4.9% of total) were preidentified by those who shared AEs as being related to the intervention or trial procedures. While overall results support the safety of DHIs, DHIs were linked to mood problems and psychosis exacerbation in a few cases. Additionally, 27% of studies did not report information on relatedness for all or at least some AEs; 9.6% of AE reports were coded as unclear because it could not be determined what had happened to participants. CONCLUSIONS The results support the safety of DHIs, but AEs must be routinely monitored and evaluated according to best practice. Individual-level analyses of AEs have merit to understand safety in this emerging field. Recommendations for best practice reporting in future studies are provided.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephanie Allan
- School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | - Thomas Ward
- School of Mental Health and Psychological Sciences, Department of Psychology Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK
- South London & Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Emily Eisner
- Division of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Imogen H Bell
- Orygen, Parkville, VIC, Australia
- Centre for Youth Mental Health, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
| | - Matteo Cella
- School of Mental Health and Psychological Sciences, Department of Psychology Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK
- South London & Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Imran B Chaudhry
- Division of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- Ziauddin University and Hospital Karachi, Karachi, Pakistan
- Pakistan Institute of Living & Learning, Karachi, Pakistan
| | - John Torous
- Department of Psychiatry, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Tayyeba Kiran
- Centre for Youth Mental Health, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
| | - Thomas Kabir
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Aansha Priyam
- Division of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Cara Richardson
- Division of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Ulrich Reininghaus
- School of Mental Health and Psychological Sciences, Department of Psychology Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK
- Department of Public Mental Health, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Anita Schick
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
- Department of Public Mental Health, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Matthias Schwannauer
- Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, School of Health in Social Science, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Suzy Syrett
- School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | - Xiaolong Zhang
- Division of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Sandra Bucci
- Division of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Canonica T, Zalachoras I. Motivational disturbances in rodent models of neuropsychiatric disorders. Front Behav Neurosci 2022; 16:940672. [PMID: 36051635 PMCID: PMC9426724 DOI: 10.3389/fnbeh.2022.940672] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/10/2022] [Accepted: 07/26/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Motivated behavior is integral to the survival of individuals, continuously directing actions toward rewards or away from punishments. The orchestration of motivated behavior depends on interactions among different brain circuits, primarily within the dopaminergic system, that subserve the analysis of factors such as the effort necessary for obtaining the reward and the desirability of the reward. Impairments in motivated behavior accompany a wide range of neuropsychiatric disorders, decreasing the patients’ quality of life. Despite its importance, motivation is often overlooked as a parameter in neuropsychiatric disorders. Here, we review motivational impairments in rodent models of schizophrenia, depression, and Parkinson’s disease, focusing on studies investigating effort-related behavior in operant conditioning tasks and on pharmacological interventions targeting the dopaminergic system. Similar motivational disturbances accompany these conditions, suggesting that treatments aimed at ameliorating motivation levels may be beneficial for various neuropsychiatric disorders.
Collapse
|