The Momentum trial: the efficacy of using a smartphone application to promote patient activation and support shared decision making in people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia in outpatient treatment settings: a randomized controlled single-blind trial

Shared decision making with schizophrenic patients: a randomized controlled clinical trial with booster sessions (DECIDE Study)

BACKGROUND

The treatment of schizophrenia requires a prolonged, multidimensional intervention that includes antipsychotic drugs. Treatment adherence is essential to effectively control the disorder. Shared decision-making (SDM) is a strategy, supported by numerous practical and ethical arguments, that seeks to involve patients in the therapeutic process to improve treatment adherence and satisfaction. The use of this model in mental health has been limited for many intrinsic and extrinsic reasons. The results of clinical trials conducted to date have largely been disappointing, potential due to study design-related limitations.

AIM/QUESTION

To evaluate the efficacy, in terms of treatment adherence and improvement in clinical variables, such as severity of symptoms, days of hospitalization or insight, of a carefully timed SDM model initiated immediately prior to hospital discharge in patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

Single-blind, randomized clinical trial in an acute psychiatric care unit within the Andalusian Health Department to compare SDM (experimental group) to treatment as usual (TAU; control group) in a sample of patients hospitalized for an acute episode of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. The study was performed between January 2014 and June 2017. The experimental group participated in SDM sessions prior to discharge with regular booster sessions over the one-year follow-up. The health care team responsible for SDM was predisposed to concordance (LatCon II scale) and received specific training in SDM. A hierarchical multiple linear regression analysis was performed to evaluate the factors independently associated with adherence, controlling for sociodemographic, clinical, and admission-related variables. Variables were assessed at admission, discharge and at 3, 6 and 12 months after discharge during the one year follow up. BARS, DAI, WAI-S, COMRADE and PANSS were used to evaluate adherence, attitude to treatment, therapeutic alliance, satisfaction and confidence with decision and clinical status, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 227 schizophrenic patients hospitalized with acute decompensation were evaluated; of these, 102 met all inclusion criteria and were included in the study. Most patients (95%) had prior experience with antipsychotics and most (82%) had experienced related side effects. Despite randomization, psychopathologic severity was greater in the experimental group, with a mean (SD) PANSS score of 104.08 (80) vs. 93.45 (20.30) (p < 0.05). The final regression model to explain adherence was significant (adjusted R2 = 0.384; F [df= 6] = 4.386; p < 0.001), with a direct, significant and independent association with SDM mediated by the number of booster sessions.

DISCUSSION

Shared decision making with booster sessions appears to increase treatment adherence in patients with severe mental disorders.

IMPLICATION ON PRACTICE

Ethical, practical, and clinical reasons support the use of strategies designed promote the use of long-term, shared decision-making in psychiatric patients, especially in schizophrenia spectrum disorder.

Facilitators and barriers in the development and implementation of depression prevention and treatment policies in China: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Depression is one of the leading causes of avoidable suffering and premature death worldwide, leading to the disease burden among mental disorders. Depression-related deaths can be prevented by developing and implementing good depression prevention and treatment policies. The goal of this study is to provide theoretical direction and useful references for examining the outstanding service work of depression prevention and treatment. It also aims to describe how depression prevention and treatment policies were developed and put into practice in China, along with the associated facilitators and barriers.

METHODS

We integrated two data sources using a case study approach: a document review of relevant policy documents, published articles and reports between 2004 and 2022 (N = 12 papers) and in-depth interviews (N = 41). Participants were drawn from pertinent sectors to managing depression: research and academia, relevant government departments, health care providers, people with depression and their families, and community organisations. Thematic analysis was used to analyse all data.

RESULTS

A comprehensive programme of work exploring specific services for depression prevention and treatment was developed in China in 2020. Facilitators of policy development and implementation include (1) political commitment and strong leadership, (2) coordination mechanisms, (3) stakeholder enthusiasm and commitment, (4) resources, and (5) the use of digital technologies. The main barriers leading to delays in policy development and implementation include (1) insufficient awareness and lack of depression literacy, (2) lack of resources and (3) stigma and social discrimination (4) lack of united action.

CONCLUSION

Although the process of implementing a distinctive service programme for depression prevention and treatment in China has been long, the current policy is in line with current global efforts. Strategies to reduce Stigma and increase knowledge about depression are part of a national and international approach to reducing the burden of depression. Political commitment and the involvement of all stakeholders remain necessary. An adequate response to depression will require the involvement of society as a whole, with joint action to reduce the risk of exposure to adversity and enhance protective factors.

Shared decision-making interventions for people with mental health conditions

BACKGROUND

One person in every four will suffer from a diagnosable mental health condition during their life. Such conditions can have a devastating impact on the lives of the individual and their family, as well as society.  International healthcare policy makers have increasingly advocated and enshrined partnership models of mental health care. Shared decision-making (SDM) is one such partnership approach. Shared decision-making is a form of service user-provider communication where both parties are acknowledged to bring expertise to the process and work in partnership to make a decision.  This review assesses whether SDM interventions improve a range of outcomes. This is the first update of this Cochrane Review, first published in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of SDM interventions for people of all ages with mental health conditions, directed at people with mental health conditions, carers, or healthcare professionals, on a range of outcomes including: clinical outcomes, participation/involvement in decision-making process (observations on the process of SDM; user-reported, SDM-specific outcomes of encounters), recovery, satisfaction, knowledge, treatment/medication continuation, health service outcomes, and adverse outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We ran searches in January 2020 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO (2009 to January 2020). We also searched trial registers and the bibliographies of relevant papers, and contacted authors of included studies.  We updated the searches in February 2022. When we identified studies as potentially relevant, we labelled these as studies awaiting classification.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including cluster-randomised controlled trials, of SDM interventions in people with mental health conditions (by Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) or International Classification of Diseases (ICD) criteria).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently screened citations for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

This updated review included 13 new studies, for a total of 15 RCTs. Most participants were adults with severe mental illnesses such as schizophrenia, depression, and bipolar disorder, in higher-income countries. None of the studies included children or adolescents.  Primary outcomes We are uncertain whether SDM interventions improve clinical outcomes, such as psychiatric symptoms, depression, anxiety, and readmission, compared with control due to very low-certainty evidence. For readmission, we conducted subgroup analysis between studies that used usual care and those that used cognitive training in the control group. There were no subgroup differences. Regarding participation (by the person with the mental health condition) or level of involvement in the decision-making process, we are uncertain if SDM interventions improve observations on the process of SDM compared with no intervention due to very low-certainty evidence. On the other hand, SDM interventions may improve SDM-specific user-reported outcomes from encounters immediately after intervention compared with no intervention (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 1.01; 3 studies, 534 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, there was insufficient evidence for sustained participation or involvement in the decision-making processes. Secondary outcomes We are uncertain whether SDM interventions improve recovery compared with no intervention due to very low-certainty evidence. We are uncertain if SDM interventions improve users' overall satisfaction. However, one study (241 participants) showed that SDM interventions probably improve some aspects of users' satisfaction with received information compared with no intervention: information given was rated as helpful (risk ratio (RR) 1.33, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.65); participants expressed a strong desire to receive information this way for other treatment decisions (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.68); and strongly recommended the information be shared with others in this way (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.58). The evidence was of moderate certainty for these outcomes. However, this same study reported there may be little or no effect on amount or clarity of information, while another small study reported there may be little or no change in carer satisfaction with the SDM intervention. The effects of healthcare professional satisfaction were mixed: SDM interventions may have little or no effect on healthcare professional satisfaction when measured continuously, but probably improve healthcare professional satisfaction when assessed categorically. We are uncertain whether SDM interventions improve knowledge, treatment continuation assessed through clinic visits, medication continuation, carer participation, and the relationship between users and healthcare professionals because of very low-certainty evidence. Regarding length of consultation, SDM interventions probably have little or no effect compared with no intervention (SDM 0.09, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.41; 2 studies, 282 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). On the other hand, we are uncertain whether SDM interventions improve length of hospital stay due to very low-certainty evidence. There were no adverse effects on health outcomes and no other adverse events reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review update suggests that people exposed to SDM interventions may perceive greater levels of involvement immediately after an encounter compared with those in control groups. Moreover, SDM interventions probably have little or no effect on the length of consultations.  Overall we found that most evidence was of low or very low certainty, meaning there is a generally low level of certainty about the effects of SDM interventions based on the studies assembled thus far. There is a need for further research in this area.

Service Providers Perspectives on Personal Recovery from Severe Mental Illness in Cape Town, South Africa: A Qualitative Study

Severe mental illnesses (SMI) contribute significantly to the global burden of disease. In low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs), the treatment gap impacts the clinical and personal recovery of people living with an SMI. The drive to reduce this treatment gap in LMICs makes it pertinent to understand service providers' views on recovery from SMI. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups with service providers from health services and non-profit organisations in the Western Cape Province, South Africa, were conducted in this qualitative study. Seventeen participants were purposively selected, and data were thematically analysed. Three major themes emerged: delineating recovery, available services supporting recovery from SMI, and facilitators and barriers to recovery at the service level. Health services favoured clinical over personal recovery. Participants thought that many service users' personal recovery from SMI was hindered by intersecting social, economic, cultural, and political inequalities that extended beyond the influence of the health sector.

Smartphone App to Promote Patient Activation and Support Shared Decision Making in People With a Diagnosis of Schizophrenia in Outpatient Treatment Settings (Momentum Trial): Randomized Controlled Assessor-blinded Trial (Preprint)

Background

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a process aimed at facilitating patient-centered care by ensuring that the patient and provider are actively involved in treatment decisions. In mental health care, SDM has been advocated as a means for the patient to gain or regain control and responsibility over their life and recovery process. To support the process of patient-centered care and SDM, digital tools may have advantages in terms of accessibility, structure, and reminders.

Objective

In this randomized controlled trial, we aimed to investigate the effect of a digital tool to support patient activation and SDM.

Methods

The trial was designed as a randomized, assessor-blinded, 2-armed, parallel-group multicenter trial investigating the use of a digital SDM intervention for 6 months compared with treatment as usual. Participants with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, schizotypal or delusional disorder were recruited from 9 outpatient treatment sites in the Capital Region of Denmark. The primary outcome was the self-reported level of activation at the postintervention time point. The secondary outcomes included self-efficacy, hope, working alliance, satisfaction, preparedness for treatment consultation, symptom severity, and level of functioning. Explorative outcomes on the effect of the intervention at the midintervention time point along with objective data on the use of the digital tool were collected.

Results

In total, 194 participants were included. The intention-to-treat analysis revealed a statistically significant effect favoring the intervention group on patient activation (mean difference 4.39, 95% CI 0.99-7.79; Cohen d=0.33; P=.01), confidence in communicating with one’s provider (mean difference 1.85, 95% CI 0.01-3.69; Cohen d=0.24; P=.05), and feeling prepared for decision-making (mean difference 5.12, 95% CI 0.16-10.08; Cohen d=0.27; P=.04). We found no effect of the digital SDM tool on treatment satisfaction, hope, self-efficacy, working alliance, severity of symptoms, level of functioning, use of antipsychotic medicine, and number or length of psychiatric hospital admissions.

Conclusions

This trial showed a significant effect of a digital SDM tool on the subjective level of patient activation, confidence in communicating with one’s provider, and feeling prepared for decision-making at the postintervention time point. The effect size was smaller than the 0.42 effect size that we had anticipated and sampled for. The trial contributes to the evidence on how digital tools may support patient-centered care and SDM in mental health care.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03554655; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03554655

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

RR2-doi: 10.1186/s12888-019-2143-2

Telehealth and Its Prospective for Improving Serious Mental Illness Conditions: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND: Health care services ought to be continued for people with serious mental illness (SMI), despite the pandemic events. These efforts help prevent recurrences of any of these medical conditions through the use of telehealth techniques. AIM: The aim of this article is to evaluate the application of telehealth among SMI patients. METHODS: This study used a scoping review framework methodology based on the report by Arksey and O’Malley. A comprehensive literature search was carried out to identify precise studies, and vigorous criteria were employed to select the revelant papers. The search was conducted in several databases, including PubMed, CINAHL (EBSCO), and Science Direct. Subsequently, the data collected were extracted by two independent reviewers, synthesized and presented in the table and narrative format. RESULTS: A total of 13 studies were identified in the search selection process based on the review objectives, and 5 of these studies were randomized control trials (RCT), while 8 used varied research designs. CONCLUSION: Based on the results of the scoping review, telehealth services were concluded to be suitable for helping people with SMI obtain the required mental health services.

mHealth for schizophrenia spectrum disorders management: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Various types of computational technologies can be used to access, store and wirelessly share private and sensitive user-related information. The 'big data' provided by these technologies may enable researchers and clinicians to better identify behavioral patterns and to provide a more personalized approach to care. The information collected, however, can be misused or potentially abused, and therefore could be detrimental to the very people who provided their medical data with the hope of improving care. This article focuses on the use of emerging mobile technologies that allow the collection of data about patients experiencing schizophrenia spectrum and related disorders. Schizophrenia has been recognized by the Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations for its burden on our health care system and society [1]. Our analysis provides an overview of the range of available mobile technologies for people with schizophrenia and related conditions along with the technology's reported capabilities and limitations, and efficacy of mHealth interventions based on the data from articles. Thus, the focus of this review is first and foremost to update the scope of existing technologies as previous systematic reviews such as the ones by Alvarez-Jimenez et al. and by Firth and Torous are outdated [2, 3]. Although we also examine the ethical issues arising from the use of these technologies, for an in-depth analysis of the ethical implications of mobile Health technologies (mHealth), we refer the readers to our follow-up article. In terms of the ubiquitous availability of technology on the internet, our article summarizes significant information for mental health specialists and apprises the reader about the existence of these technologies.

OBJECTIVES

In terms of the ubiquitous availability of technology on the internet, our article summarizes significant information for mental health specialists and apprises the reader about the existence of these technologies.

New Path to Recovery and Well-Being: Cross-Sectional Study on WeChat Use and Endorsement of WeChat-Based mHealth Among People Living With Schizophrenia in China

Background

The past few decades have seen an exponential increase in using mobile phones to support medical care (mobile health [mHealth]) among people living with psychosis worldwide, yet little is known about WeChat use and WeChat-based mHealth among people living with schizophrenia (PLS) in China.

Objective

This study aims to assess WeChat use, endorsement of WeChat-based mHealth programs, and health related to WeChat use among PLS.

Methods

We recruited a random sample of 400 PLS from 12 communities in Changsha City of Hunan Province, China. WeChat use was assessed using the adapted WeChat Use Intensity Questionnaire (WUIQ). We also compared psychiatric symptoms, functioning, disability, recovery, quality of life, and general well-being between WeChat users and nonusers using one-to-one propensity-score matching.

Results

The WeChat use rate was 40.8% in this sample (163/400); 30.7% (50/163) had more than 50 WeChat friends and nearly half (81/163, 49.7%) spent more than half an hour on WeChat, a pattern similar to college students and the elderly. PLS also showed higher emotional connectedness to WeChat use than college students. About 80.4% (131/163) of PLS were willing to participate in a WeChat-based mHealth program, including psychoeducation (91/163, 55.8%), professional support (82/163, 50.3%), and peer support (67/163, 41.1%). Compared with nonusers, WeChat users were younger, better educated, and more likely to be employed. WeChat use was associated with improved health outcomes, including lower psychiatric symptoms, lower depression, higher functioning, better recovery, and higher quality of life.

Conclusions

WeChat-based mHealth programs hold promise as an empowering tool to provide cost-effective interventions, to foster global recovery, and to improve both physical and mental well-being among PLS. WeChat and WeChat-based mHealth programs have the potential to offer a new path to recovery and well-being for PLS in China.

The role of shared decision-making in improving adherence to pharmacological treatments in patients with schizophrenia: a clinical review

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a process in which the doctor provides clear and complete medical information to patients about their treatment, and patients provide information on his/her preferences. Patients and clinicians bring different, but equally important, knowledge to the decision-making process. Through the adoption of SDM, it should be possible to overcome the barriers that hinder the acceptance of long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) by patients, and often also by psychiatrists. The present paper is a critical appraisal of recent literature on the impact of SDM in improving adherence to pharmacological treatments and in implementing the use of LAIs in the treatment of patients with schizophrenia. SDM is recognized as a promising strategy to improve collaboration between clinicians and patients in achieving recovery. When considering drug treatments, clinicians must evaluate the patient's preferences, expectations and concerns towards the development of a personalized treatment strategy. Moreover, an active involvement in the decision process could reduce the patient's perception of being coerced into the use of LAIs. Involving patients in the choice of therapy is not sufficient to increase pharmacological adherence if, at the same time, there is no constant work of comparison and communication with the reference psychiatric team. SDM can be particularly effective for LAI prescription, since patient can have prejudices and unjustified fears related to the LAI formulation, which the doctor must resolve.

Smartphone Apps to Support Coordinated Specialty Care for Prodromal and Early Course Schizophrenia Disorders: Systematic Review

Background

Demand for mental health services, especially for clinical high-risk and early psychosis, has increased, creating a need for new solutions to increase access to and quality of care. Smartphones and mobile technology are potential tools to support coordinated specialty care for early psychosis, given their potential to augment the six core roles of care: case management and team leadership, recovery-oriented psychotherapy, medication management, support for employment and education, coordination with primary care services, and family education and support. However, the services smartphones are actually offering specifically for coordinated specialty care and the level of evidence are unknown.

Objective

This study aimed to review the published literature on smartphone technology to enhance care for patients with prodromal and early course psychosis and schizophrenia and to analyze studies by type, aligned with coordinated specialty care domains.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted on August 16 and 17, 2019, using the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Sciences, and PsycINFO electronic databases. The eligible studies were reviewed and screened based on inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Results

The search uncovered 388 unique results, of which 32 articles met the initial inclusion criteria; 21 eligible studies on 16 unique app platforms were identified. Feasibility studies showed a high user engagement and interest among patients, monitoring studies demonstrated a correlation between app assessments and clinical outcomes, and intervention studies indicated that these apps have the potential to advance care. Eighteen studies reported on app use for the case management roles of coordinated specialty care. No app studies focused on employment and education, coordination with primary care services, and family education and support.

Conclusions

Although the published literature on smartphone apps for prodromal and first-episode psychosis is small, it is growing exponentially and holds promise to augment both monitoring and interventions. Although the research results and protocols for app studies are not well aligned with all coordinated specialty care roles today, high rates of adoption and feasibility suggest the potential for future efforts. These results will be used to develop coordinated specialty care–specific app evaluation scales and toolkits.