INTRODUCTION: At least one in four people treated by the primary care improving access to psychological therapies (IAPT) programme in England experiences distressing psychotic experiences (PE) in addition to common mental disorder (CMD). These individuals are less likely to achieve recovery. IAPT services do not routinely screen for nor offer specific treatments for CMD including PE. The Tailoring evidence-based psychological therapY for People with common mental disorder including Psychotic EXperiences study will evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of an enhanced training for cognitive behavioural therapists that aims to address this clinical gap. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multisite, stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial. The setting will be IAPT services within three mental health trusts. The participants will be (1) 56-80 qualified IAPT cognitive behavioural therapists and (2) 600 service users who are triaged as appropriate for cognitive behavioural therapy in an IAPT service and have PE according to the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences-Positive 15-items Scale. IAPT therapists will be grouped into eight study clusters subsequently randomised to the control-intervention sequence. We will obtain pseudonymous clinical outcome data from IAPT clinical records for eligible service users. We will invite service users to complete health economic measures at baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12-month follow-up. The primary outcome will be the proportion of patients with common mental disorder psychotic experiences who have recovered by the end of treatment as measured by the official IAPT measure for recovery. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study received the following approvals: South Central-Berkshire Research Ethics Committee on 28 April 2020 (REC reference 20/SC/0135) and Health Research Authority (HRA) on 23 June 2020. An amendment was approved by the Ethics Committee on 01 October 2020 and HRA on 27 October 2020. Results will be made available to patients and the public, the funders, stakeholders in the IAPT services and other researchers. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN93895792.
- MeSH
- dostupnost zdravotnických služeb MeSH
- duševní poruchy * terapie MeSH
- kognitivně behaviorální terapie * metody MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- primární zdravotní péče MeSH
- psychotické poruchy * terapie MeSH
- randomizované kontrolované studie jako téma MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- práce podpořená grantem MeSH
- protokol klinické studie MeSH
Evidence suggests that attachment styles may influence subclinical psychosis phenotypes (schizotypy) and affective disorders and may play a part in the association between psychosis and childhood adversity. However, the role of attachment in the initial stages of psychosis remains poorly understood. Our main aim was to describe and compare attachment styles in 60 individuals at ultra high risk for psychosis (UHR) and a matched sample of 60 healthy volunteers (HV). The HV had lower anxious and avoidant attachment scores than the UHR individuals (p < .001). Sixty-nine percentage of the UHR group had more than one DSM-IV diagnosis, mainly affective and anxiety disorders. The UHR group experienced more trauma (p < .001) and more mood and anxiety symptoms (p < .001). Interestingly, in our UHR group, only schizotypy paranoia was correlated with insecure attachment. In the HV group, depression, anxiety, schizotypy paranoia, and social anxiety were correlated with insecure attachment. This difference and some discrepancies with previous studies involving UHR suggest that individuals at UHR may compose a heterogeneous group; some experience significant mood and/or anxiety symptoms that may not be explained by specific attachment styles. Nonetheless, measuring attachment in UHR individuals could help maximize therapeutic relationships to enhance recovery.
- MeSH
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mladiství MeSH
- mladý dospělý MeSH
- připoutání k objektu * MeSH
- psychotické poruchy psychologie MeSH
- Check Tag
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mladiství MeSH
- mladý dospělý MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- Geografické názvy
- Anglie MeSH
BACKGROUND: General practitioners are usually the first health professionals to be contacted by people with early signs of psychosis. We aimed to assess whether increased liaison between primary and secondary care improves the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of detection of people with, or at high risk of developing, a first psychotic illness. METHODS: Our Liaison and Education in General Practices (LEGs) study was a cluster-randomised controlled trial of primary care practices (clusters) in Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, UK. Consenting practices were randomly allocated (1:1) to a 2 year low-intensity intervention (a postal campaign, consisting of biannual guidelines to help identify and refer individuals with early signs of psychosis) or a high-intensity intervention, which additionally included a specialist mental health professional who liaised with every practice and a theory-based educational package. Practices were not masked to group allocation. Practices that did not consent to be randomly assigned comprised a practice-as-usual (PAU) group. The primary outcome was number of referrals of patients at high risk of developing psychosis to the early intervention service per practice site. New referrals were assessed clinically and stratified into those who met criteria for high risk or first-episode psychotic illness (FEP; together: psychosis true positives), and those who did not fulfil such criteria for psychosis (false positives). Referrals from PAU practices were also analysed. We assessed cost-effectiveness with decision analytic modelling in terms of the incremental cost per additional true positive identified. The trial is registered at the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN70185866. FINDINGS: Between Dec 22, 2009, and Sept 7, 2010, 54 of 104 eligible practices provided consent and between Feb 16, 2010, and Feb 11, 2011, these practices were randomly allocated to interventions (28 to low intensity and 26 to high intensity); the remaining 50 practices comprised the PAU group. Two high-intensity practices were excluded from the analysis. In the 2 year intervention period, high-intensity practices referred more FEP cases than did low-intensity practices (mean 1.25 [SD 1.2] for high intensity vs 0.7 [0.9] for low intensity; incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.9, 95% CI 1.05-3.4, p=0.04), although the difference was not statistically significant for individuals at high risk of psychosis (0.9 [1.0] vs 0.5 [1.0]; 2.2, 0.9-5.1, p=0.08). For high risk and FEP combined, high-intensity practices referred both more true-positive (2.2 [1.7] vs 1.1 [1.7]; 2.0, 1.1-3.6, p=0.02) and false-positive (2.3 [2.4] vs 0.9 [1.2]; 2.6, 1.3-5.0, p=0.005) cases. Referral patterns did not differ between low-intensity and PAU practices. Total cost per true-positive referral in the 2 year follow-up was £26,785 in high-intensity practices, £27,840 in low-intensity practices, and £30,007 in PAU practices. INTERPRETATION: This intensive intervention to improve liaison between primary and secondary care for people with early signs of psychosis was clinically and cost effective. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research.
- MeSH
- analýza nákladů a výnosů MeSH
- dospělí MeSH
- hodnocení rizik MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mladiství MeSH
- mladý dospělý MeSH
- primární zdravotní péče ekonomika organizace a řízení MeSH
- psychotické poruchy diagnóza MeSH
- sekundární péče ekonomika organizace a řízení MeSH
- shluková analýza MeSH
- výsledek terapie MeSH
- Check Tag
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mladiství MeSH
- mladý dospělý MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- práce podpořená grantem MeSH
- randomizované kontrolované studie MeSH
