Effectiveness of an online dialectical behavior therapy skills training in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

The current study aims to examine the efficacy of an add-on dialectical behavior therapy skills training (DBT-ST) on adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The DBT-ST was applied online under the pandemic conditions that occurred after the study had started.

METHODS

The current randomized controlled trial consists of an intervention group to whom the DBT-ST was applied in online setting and a waitlist control group who received treatment as usual (TAU). Data were collected pre-, post-, and mid-treatment. ADHD symptoms (with the sub-dimensions of inattention and hyperactivity), impulsivity, mindfulness, difficulty with emotion regulation, interpersonal effectiveness, distress tolerance, life satisfaction, functionality in daily life, and general psychological symptom levels were measured with self-report scales. The data were analyzed using mixed-design ANOVA.

RESULTS

The global ADHD, inattention, and hyperactivity symptoms of the DBT-ST group significantly decreased more than those in the TAU control group. The DBT-ST group also showed a significant decrease regarding difficulty with emotion regulation and increases in life satisfaction and functionality, though the group × time effect was not significant.

CONCLUSION

DBT-ST was found effective against the participants' ADHD symptoms. The treatment was additionally found to improve their emotion regulation and quality of life. Further investigation is needed to investigate DBT-ST in an online setting.

Anxiety among front-line health-care workers supporting patients with COVID-19: A global survey

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to explore anxiety status across a broad range of HCWs supporting patients with COVID-19 in different global regions.

METHOD

This was an international online survey in which participation was on voluntary basis and data were submitted via Google Drive, across a two-week period starting from March 18, 2020. The Beck Anxiety Inventory was used to quantify the level of anxiety.

RESULTS

1416 HCWs (70.8% medical doctors, 26.2% nurses) responded to the survey from 75 countries. The distribution of anxiety levels was: normal/minimal (n = 503, 35.5%), low (n = 390, 27.5%); moderate (n = 287, 20.3%), and severe (n = 236, 16.7%). According to multiple generalized linear model, female gender (p = 0.001), occupation (ie, being a nurse dealing directly with patients with COVID-19 [p = 0.017]), being younger (p = 0.001), reporting inadequate knowledge on COVID-19 (p = 0.005), having insufficient personal protective equipment (p = 0.001) and poor access to hand sanitizers or liquid soaps (p = 0.008), coexisting chronic disorders (p = 0.001) and existing mental health problems (p = 0.001), and higher income of countries where HCWs lived (p = 0.048) were significantly associated with increased anxiety.

CONCLUSIONS

Front-line HCWs, regardless of the levels of COVID-19 transmission in their country, are anxious when they do not feel protected. Our findings suggest that anxiety could be mitigated ensuring sufficient levels of protective personal equipment alongside greater education and information.

Psychiatric symptoms, challenging behaviour and utilization of psychiatric services among adults with intellectual disabilities in Turkey

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of and the factors associated with psychiatric symptoms (PS) and challenging behaviour (CB) in adults with intellectual disabilities, and the utilization of psychiatric services in Turkey.

METHOD

Psychiatric Assessment Schedule for Adults with Developmental Disorders Checklist-Revised was used for PS and a structured form for other variables in 771 participants.

RESULTS

Of the participants, 50.1% had PS and 36.4% presented with CB. Multivariate analysis revealed that a higher level of needs, better verbal ability, residential living, incontinence and CB, and lifetime suicidal ideation/attempt were independently associated with PS. For CB, it emerged as male carer, PS, lifetime suicidal attempt/ideation, lower level of verbal ability and autism spectrum disorder. Barriers were experienced by 64.7% of participants within the previous year.

CONCLUSIONS

Psychiatric symptoms and CB seem to be problems for a significant proportion of adults with intellectual disabilities in Turkey, and there are certain barriers to psychiatric services.

Pharmacological interventions for self-injurious behaviour in adults with intellectual disabilities: Abridged republication of a Cochrane systematic review

We aimed to determine clinical effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for self-injurious behaviour in adults with intellectual disability. We searched the following databases: CENTRAL; MEDLINE; EMBASE; PsycINFO; CINAHL; SCI; SSCI; Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science; Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Social Science and Humanities; ZETOC; World Cat .We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov,ICTRP and the reference lists of included trials. We included randomised controlled trials that examined drug interventions versus placebo for self-injurious behaviour. We found five double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, which included a total of 50 people. Four trials compared the effects of naltrexone versus placebo and one trial clomipramine versus placebo. We did not identify any relevant placebo-controlled trials for other drugs. We presented a narrative summary, as meta-analysis was not appropriate due to differences in study designs, differences between interventions and heterogeneous outcome measures. There was weak evidence in included trials that any active drug was more effective than placebo for people with intellectual disability demonstrating self-injurious behaviour. Due to sparse data, an absence of power and statistical significance, and high risk of bias for four of the included trials, we are unable to reach any definite conclusions about the relative benefits of naltrexone or clomipramine compared to placebo.

Pharmacological interventions for self-injurious behaviour in adults with intellectual disabilities

BACKGROUND

Self-injurious behaviour among people with intellectual disability is relatively common and often persistent. Self-injurious behaviour continues to present a challenge to clinicians. It remains poorly understood and difficult to ameliorate despite advances in neurobiology and psychological therapies. There is a strong need for a better evidence base in prescribing and monitoring of drugs in this population, especially since none of the drugs are actually licensed for self-injurious behaviour.

OBJECTIVES

To determine clinical effectiveness of pharmacological interventions in management of self-injurious behaviour in adults with intellectual disability.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases on 19 February 2012: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Science Citation Index, Social Science Citation Index, Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science, Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Social Science and Humanities, ZETOC and WorldCat. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov, ICTRP and the reference lists of included trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that examined drug interventions versus placebo for self-injurious behaviour (SIB) in adults with intellectual disability.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias for each trial using a data extraction form. We present a narrative summary of the results is presented. We did not consider meta-analysis was appropriate due to differences in study designs, differences between interventions and heterogeneous outcome measures.

MAIN RESULTS

We found five double-blind placebo-controlled trials that met our inclusion criteria. These trials assessed effectiveness and safety of drugs in a total of 50 people with intellectual disability demonstrating SIB. Four trials compared the effects of naltrexone versus placebo and one trial compared clomipramine versus placebo.One of the naltrexone versus placebo trials reported that naltrexone had clinically significant effects (≥ 33% reduction) on the daily rates of three of the four participants' most severe form of SIB and modest to substantial reductions in SIB for all participants; however, this study did not report on statistical significance. Another trial reported that naltrexone attenuated SIB in all four participants, with 25 mg and 50 mg doses producing a statistically significant decrease in SIB (P value < 0.05). Another trial (eight people) indicated that naltrexone administration was associated with significantly fewer days of high frequency self injury and significantly more days with low frequency self injury. Naltrexone had different effects depending on the form and location of self injury. Another trial with only 26 participants found that neither single-dose (100 mg) nor long-term (50 and 150 mg) naltrexone treatment had any therapeutic effect on SIB.Comparison of clomipramine versus placebo found no statistically significant benefit for any outcome measure, which included SIB rate and intensity, stereotypy and adverse events. However, it showed clinically significant improvement in the rate and intensity of SIB and stereotypy.There were very few noteworthy adverse events to report in any of the four trials in which these were reported.All trials were at high risk of bias, apart from one trial (Lewis 1996), which was probably at low risk of bias. The short period of follow-up was a significant drawback in the design of all five trials, as it did not allow long-term assessment of behaviour over time.We were unable to examine the efficacy of antidepressants other than clomipramine, antipsychotics, mood stabilisers or beta-blockers as we did not identify any relevant placebo-controlled trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was weak evidence in included trials that any active drug was more effective than placebo for people with intellectual disability demonstrating SIB. Due to sparse data, an absence of power and statistical significance, and high risk of bias for four of the included trials, we are unable to reach any definite conclusions about the relative benefits of naltrexone or clomipramine compared to placebo.