COPe-support - a multi-component digital intervention for family carers for people affected by psychosis: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

The role of digital tools in providing youth mental health: results from an international multi-center study

Since the traditional mental health system showed significant limitations in the early identification, diagnosis and treatment of the current new youth psychopathological trajectories, by substantially failing in targeting the needs of the current young generation, there is the demand to redesign and digitally adapt youth mental health care and systems. Indeed, the level of digital literacy and the level of digital competency and knowledge in the field of digital psychiatry is still under-investigated among mental health professionals, particularly in youth mental health. Therefore, we aimed at: (a) carrying out a post-hoc analysis of an international multi-centre study, to investigate the opinions of mental health professionals regarding the feasibility, efficacy and clinical experience in delivering digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) in youths; (b) providing a comprehensive overview on the integrated digitally-based youth mental health care models and innovations. Mental health professionals declared the lack of a formal training in digital psychiatry, particularly in youth mental health. Subjects who received a formal theoretical/practical training on DMHIs displayed a statistical trend towards a positive feasibility of digital psychiatry in youth mental health (p = 0.053) and a perceived increased efficacy of digital psychiatry in youths (p = 0.051). Respondents with higher Digital Psychiatry Opinion (DPO) scores reported a positive perceived feasibility of DMHIs in youths (p < 0.041) and are more prone to deliver DMHIs to young people (p < 0.001). Respondents with higher knowledge scores (KS) declared that DMHIs are more effective in youth mental health (p < 0.001). Overall, the digitalisation indeed allowed young people to keep in touch with a mental health professional, facilitating a more dynamic and fluid mental health care access and monitoring, generally preferred and considered more feasible by post-Millennial youngsters. Accordingly, our findings demonstrated that mental health professionals are more prone to offer DMHIs in youth mental health, particularly whether previously trained and knowledgeable on the topic.

Family Intervention in Severe Mental Disorder: An Online Intervention Format in Psychosocial Rehabilitation Centers

The use of new technologies and online interventions with family members of people affected by severe mental disorders (SMD) seems to emerge as a promising complementary strategy to face-to-face care. The article presents a new online intervention format, aimed at relatives of people with SMD. A qualitative methodology sequenced in seven phases has been used. (1) The incorporation of relatives into the programme has allowed the intervention format to be adapted to the needs and opinions of the relatives themselves. (2) All the relatives were completely satisfied with the new online intervention format, and with how useful it had been for them. (1) The attention and support to family members of people with SMD through the Internet is a complementary intervention strategy to face-to-face care. (2) The online format of attention to family members can be incorporated into the usual practice of care services.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40737-022-00310-7.

Effect of digital psychoeducation and peer support on the mental health of family carers supporting individuals with psychosis in England (COPe-support): a randomised clinical trial

Background

Psychoeducation delivered face-to-face is effective in alleviating mental health morbidities in family carers of individuals with psychosis. However, research in such interventions delivered online is scarce. We evaluated the effectiveness of a digital multicomponent intervention—COPe-support—in improving carers' mental wellbeing and caregiving-related outcomes.

Methods

In this two-arm, individually randomised, superiority trial, people aged 18 years or older who provided at least weekly support in any format for a relative or close friend affected by psychosis across England were randomly assigned (1:1) to either COPe-support or a passive online information resource using an independent online system. Participants were recruited through 30 mental health UK National Health Service trusts. The study team were masked to allocation and assessment of outcomes as all data collection took place online. Participants had access to either condition for 40 weeks and were advised to spend at least half an hour per week over the initial 20 weeks to go through materials at their own pace and to allow time to integrate knowledge and skills learned into practice. It was not feasible to mask participants or the online facilitator to intervention allocation. COPe-support provided psychoeducation on psychosis-related caregiving strategies and forums with professionals and other carers, and the control intervention comprised a passive online information resource. The primary outcome at 20 weeks was mental wellbeing measured by the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (WEMWBS; minimally clinically important difference [MCID] 3). This trial is registered with ISRCTN, 89563420.

Findings

Between March 1, 2018, and Feb 14, 2020, 407 participants were randomly assigned, with 204 allocated to COPe-support and 203 allocated to control. The participants (mean age 53·1 years, SD 13·2) were mostly female (330 [81%] of 407 participants) and White (359 [88%] of 407 participants). 346 (85%) of 407 participants provided primary endpoint data, 174 (85%) of 204 participants in the COPe-support group and 172 (85%) of 203 participants in the control group. The mean WEMWBS score at 20 weeks was 44·5 (SD 8·31) for the COPe-support group and 43·3 (9·19) for the control group. We found no evidence of a difference in wellbeing between the two groups (adjusted mean difference 0·37, 95% CI –1·14 to 1·88; p=0·63). In the COPe-support group, 106 (52%) of 204 participants met the complier definition of a minimum of two logins in separate weeks. The complier average causal effect analysis increased the difference in WEMWBS scores (adjusted difference 0·83, 95% CI –1·45 to 3·11; p=0·47), but this was lower than the MCID. There were no adverse events.

Interpretation

Our findings did not support the use of COPe-support over a passive online information resource. However, further research to optimise digital interventions adjunctive to face-to-face support for carers remains important.

Funding

National Institute for Health Research.

Perceived Acceptability and Experiences of a Digital Psychoeducation and Peer Support Intervention (COPe-support): Interview Study With Carers Supporting Individuals With Psychosis

Background

Web-based mental health interventions offer a novel, accessible, and self-paced approach to care delivery to family carers (ie, relatives and close friends who support a loved one with psychosis). We coproduced COPe-support (Carers fOr People with Psychosis e-support), a psychoeducational intervention delivered via an enriched web-based learning environment with network support from professionals and peers. In addition to the rigorous investigation of the effectiveness of COPe-support on the well-being of carers and mental health outcomes, it is imperative to understand the experiences of using the web-based intervention by carers and its associated web-based implementation and facilitation strategies.

Objective

This study aims to explore the experiences of carers and perceived acceptability of COPe-support and its different components, how carers found engagement with COPe-support affected their own well-being and caregiving, and the ideas of carers for improving COPe-support and its delivery to inform any future wider implementation.

Methods

We conducted a qualitative study, individually interviewing 35 carers, following their use of COPe-support for 8 months through a web-based, randomized controlled trial across England. A semistructured guide with open-ended questions was used to explore the experiences of carers and perceived acceptability of the intervention and their ideas to improve the provision. All interviews were conducted remotely through mobile phones or internet communication media, audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. We used a thematic analysis framework to analyze the data.

Results

Three key themes were identified: remote, flexible, and personalized support; impacts on well-being and outlook on caregiving; and future implementation and integration with existing services. Overall, carers found COPe-support a flexible source of knowledge and support from professionals and peers that they could personalize to suit their own needs and convenience. Participants described gaining self-confidence, hope, and a sense of connectivity with others in a similar situation, which helped ameliorate isolation and perceived stigma. Most importantly, COPe-support promoted self-care among the carers themselves. Participants’ experiences, use, and activity on COPe-support varied greatly and differed among carers of various ages and levels of computer literacy.

Conclusions

Nearly all participants had a positive experience with COPe-support and supported its wider implementation as a beneficial adjunctive support resource for carers in the future. Any future scale-up of such an intervention needs to consider feedback from carers and suggestions for further improvement. These included having more graphics and audiovisual content materials, improving the navigation, and building in more interactional and customization options to suit various user styles, such as emoji reactions, live web-based chat, opting in and out of updates, and choosing the frequency of reminders. To ensure successful implementation, we should also consider factors pertinent to reaching more carers and integrating the web-based resources with other conventional services.

Trial Registration

International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) 89563420; https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN89563420

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

RR2-10.1186/s12888-020-02528-w

Mental health and caregiving experiences of family carers supporting people with psychosis

AIMS

Family carers supporting an individual with psychosis often experience poorer mental health, however, little is known about specific risk factors among these carers. We investigated the associations between demographic, caregiving characteristics and mental health outcomes in family carers supporting an individual with psychosis and compared carers' outcomes with general population norms.

METHODS

We analysed baseline data from the COPe-support randomised controlled trial of online psychoeducation and peer support for adult carers supporting an individual with psychosis between 2018 and 2020. We collected carers' demographic and health outcome data, including wellbeing using Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (WEMWBS as primary outcome), quality of life using EQ-5D-5L and caregiving experience assessed with Experience of Caregiving Inventory. We tested associations between carers' demographic and caregiving characteristics for each outcome in turn and meta-analysed carers' WEMWBS and EQ-5D-5L with Health Survey England (HSE) general population data from 2016 and 2017, respectively.

RESULTS

The 407 carers of people with psychosis had a mean WEMWBS score of 42.2 (s.d. 9.21) and their overall weighted pooled WEMWBS score was 7.3 (95% confidence interval (CI) -8.6 to -6.0, p < 0.01) lower than the HSE general population sample, indicating carers have poorer mental wellbeing by more than double the minimum clinically important difference of 3 points on WEMWBS. Among all caring relationships, partners had poorer wellbeing compared to parents with lower WEMWBS score (-6.8, -16.9 to 3.3, p = 0.03). Single carers had significantly poorer wellbeing (-3.6, -5.6 to -1.5, p < 0.01) and a more negative caregiving experience than those who were cohabiting. Spending more than 35 h per week caregiving increased carers' negative experience significantly (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Carers of people with psychosis have poorer mental health than non-carers. Partners, lone carers and those spending more than 35 h per week on caring were found to be most at risk of poor mental health. Based on the results, we advocate that the details of carers for individuals with psychosis should be added to the existing carers or severe mental illness registers at all general practitioner surgeries and for their wellbeing screened routinely. Future large-scale prospective studies are needed to develop a predictive model to determine risk factors, hence to aid early identification of carers' support needs. Such understandings are also useful to inform tailored intervention development.