scholarly journals Cognitive therapy for people with a schizophrenia spectrum diagnosis not taking antipsychotic medication: an exploratory trial

2011 ◽  
Vol 42 (5) ◽  
pp. 1049-1056 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. P. Morrison ◽  
P. Hutton ◽  
M. Wardle ◽  
H. Spencer ◽  
S. Barratt ◽  
...  

BackgroundAlthough antipsychotic medication is the first line of treatment for schizophrenia, many service users choose to refuse or discontinue their pharmacological treatment. Cognitive therapy (CT) has been shown to be effective when delivered in combination with antipsychotic medication, but has yet to be formally evaluated in its absence. This study evaluates CT for people with psychotic disorders who have not been taking antipsychotic medication for at least 6 months.MethodTwenty participants with schizophrenia spectrum disorders received CT in an open trial. Our primary outcome was psychiatric symptoms measured using the Positive and Negative Syndromes Scale (PANSS), which was administered at baseline, 9 months (end of treatment) and 15 months (follow-up). Secondary outcomes were dimensions of hallucinations and delusions, self-rated recovery and social functioning.ResultsT tests and Wilcoxon's signed ranks tests revealed significant beneficial effects on all primary and secondary outcomes at end of treatment and follow-up, with the exception of self-rated recovery at end of treatment. Cohen's d effect sizes were moderate to large [for PANSS total, d=0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32–1.35 at end of treatment; d=1.26, 95% CI 0.66–1.84 at follow-up]. A response rate analysis found that 35% and 50% of participants achieved at least a 50% reduction in PANSS total scores by end of therapy and follow-up respectively. No patients deteriorated significantly.ConclusionsThis study provides preliminary evidence that CT is an acceptable and effective treatment for people with psychosis who choose not to take antipsychotic medication. An adequately powered randomized controlled trial is warranted.

2017 ◽  
Vol 52 (9) ◽  
pp. 594-600 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandra Narciso Garcia ◽  
Lucíola da Cunha Menezes Costa ◽  
Mark J Hancock ◽  
Fabrício Soares de Souza ◽  
Geórgia Vieira Freschi de Oliveira Gomes ◽  
...  

BackgroundThe McKenzie Method of Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) is one of the exercise approaches recommended by low back pain (LBP) guidelines. We investigated the efficacy of MDT compared with placebo in patients with chronic LBP.MethodsThis was a prospectively registered, two-arm randomised placebo controlled trial, with a blinded assessor. A total of 148 patients seeking care for chronic LBP were randomly allocated to either MDT (n=74) or placebo (n=74). Patients from both groups received 10 treatment sessions over 5 weeks. Patients from both groups also received an educational booklet. Clinical outcomes were obtained at the end of treatment (5 weeks) and 3, 6 and 12 months after randomisation. Primary outcomes were pain intensity and disability at the end of treatment (5 weeks). We also conducted a subgroup analysis to identify potential treatment effect modifiers that could predict a better response to MDT treatment.ResultsThe MDT group had greater improvements in pain intensity at the end of treatment (mean difference (MD) −1.00, 95% CI −2.09 to −0.01) but not for disability (MD −0.84, 95% CI −2.62 to 0.93). We did not detect between-group differences for any secondary outcomes, nor were any treatment effect modifiers identified. Patients did not report any adverse events.ConclusionWe found a small and likely not clinically relevant difference in pain intensity favouring the MDT method immediately at the end of 5 weeks of treatment but not for disability. No other difference was found for any of the primary or secondary outcomes at any follow-up times.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02123394)


2017 ◽  
Vol 63 (3) ◽  
pp. 212-223 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdalhadi Hasan ◽  
Mahmoud Musleh

Aims: The aim of the study was to assess what empowerment intervention has on people with schizophrenia. Methods: A randomized controlled trial was carried out between November 2015 and May 2016 involving 112 participants who had been diagnosed with schizophrenia. Patients, who were 18 years and above diagnosed with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.; DSM-V) schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder from the outpatient mental health clinics in Jordan, were randomly assigned to take part in an intervention that consisted of receiving 6 weeks’ worth of information booklets, with face to face discussions, while receiving their usual medication or allocated treatment as usual. The participants were assessed at baseline, immediately after the intervention and at 3-month follow-up. The primary outcome was a change in the helplessness score. Secondary outcomes were psychiatric symptoms, recovery rate, empowerment and quality of life. Results: This study showed that people with schizophrenia in the intervention group showed more improvement in the helplessness score immediately post-intervention ( F = 74.53, p < .001) and at 3-month follow-up ( F = 75.56, p < .001), they reported significant improvements in all secondary outcomes. Conclusion: This study indicated that the empowering intervention was an effective intervention when integrated with treatment as usual.


Author(s):  
Iris E Sommer ◽  
Shiral S Gangadin ◽  
Lot D de Witte ◽  
Sanne Koops ◽  
C van Baal ◽  
...  

Abstract Schizophrenia-spectrum disorders (SSD) are associated with increased inflammatory markers, both in brain and periphery. Augmentation with drugs that lower this pro-inflammatory status may improve clinical presentation. Simvastatin crosses the blood-brain barrier, has anti- inflammatory and neuroprotective effects and reduces metabolic syndrome. In this study, we investigated if 12 months of simvastatin augmentation can improve symptoms and cognition in patients with early SSD. This double-blind placebo-controlled trial included 127 SSD patients across the Netherlands, &lt;3 years after their diagnosis. From these, 119 were randomly assigned 1:1 to simvastatin 40 mg (n = 61) or placebo (n = 58), stratified for sex and study site. Primary outcomes were symptom severity and cognition after 12 months of treatment. Depression, symptom subscores, general functioning, metabolic syndrome, movement disorders, and safety were secondary outcomes. Intention to treat analyses were performed using linear mixed models and ANCOVA. No main effect of simvastatin treatment was found on total symptom severity after 12 months of treatment as compared to placebo (X2(1) = 0.01, P = .90). Group differences varied over time (treatment*time X2(4) = 11.2; P = .025), with significantly lower symptom severity in the simvastatin group after 6 months (mean difference = −4.8; P = .021; 95% CI: −8.8 to −0.7) and at 24 months follow-up (mean difference = −4.7; P = .040; 95% CI: −9.3 to −0.2). No main treatment effect was found for cognition (F(1,0.1) = 0.37, P = .55) or secondary outcomes. SAEs occurred more frequently with placebo (19%) than with simvastatin (6.6%). This negative finding corroborates other large scale studies on aspirin, minocycline, and celecoxib that could not replicate positive findings of smaller studies, and suggests that anti-inflammatory augmentation does not improve the clinical presentation of SSD.


2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (11) ◽  
pp. 1-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Priebe ◽  
Mark Savill ◽  
Til Wykes ◽  
Richard Bentall ◽  
Christoph Lauber ◽  
...  

BackgroundThe negative symptoms of schizophrenia significantly impact on quality of life and social functioning, and current treatment options are limited. In this study the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of group body psychotherapy as a treatment for negative symptoms were compared with an active control.DesignA parallel-arm, multisite randomised controlled trial. Randomisation was conducted independently of the research team, using a 1 : 1 computer-generated sequence. Assessors and statisticians were blinded to treatment allocation. Analysis was conducted following the intention-to-treat principle. In the cost-effectiveness analysis, a health and social care perspective was adopted.ParticipantsEligibility criteria: age 18–65 years; diagnosis of schizophrenia with symptoms present at > 6 months; score of ≥ 18 on Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) negative symptoms subscale; no change in medication type in past 6 weeks; willingness to participate; ability to give informed consent; and community outpatient. Exclusion criteria: inability to participate in the groups and insufficient command of English.SettingsParticipants were recruited from NHS mental health community services in five different Trusts. All groups took place in local community spaces.InterventionsControl intervention: a 10-week, 90-minute, 20-session group beginners’ Pilates class, run by a qualified Pilates instructor. Treatment intervention: a 10-week, 90-minute, 20-session manualised group body psychotherapy group, run by a qualified dance movement psychotherapist.OutcomesThe primary outcome was the PANSS negative symptoms subscale score at end of treatment. Secondary outcomes included measures of psychopathology, functional, social, service use and treatment satisfaction outcomes, both at treatment end and at 6-month follow-up.ResultsA total of 275 participants were randomised (140 body psychotherapy group, 135 Pilates group). At the end of treatment, 264 participants were assessed (137 body psychotherapy group, 127 Pilates group). The adjusted difference in means of the PANSS negative subscale at the end of treatment was 0.03 [95% confidence interval (CI) –1.11 to 1.17], showing no advantage of the intervention. In the secondary outcomes, the mean difference in the Clinical Assessment Interview for negative symptoms expression subscale at the end of treatment was 0.62 (95% CI –1.23 to 0.00), and in extrapyramidal movement disorder symptoms –0.65 (95% CI –1.13 to –0.16) at the end of treatment and –0.58 (95% CI –1.07 to –0.09) at 6 months’ follow-up, showing a small significant advantage of body psychotherapy. No serious adverse events related to the interventions were reported. The total costs of the intervention were comparable with the control, with no clear evidence of cost-effectiveness for either condition.LimitationsOwing to the absence of a treatment-as-usual arm, it is difficult to determine whether or not both arms are an improvement over routine care.ConclusionsIn comparison with an active control, group body psychotherapy does not have a clinically relevant beneficial effect in the treatment of patients with negative symptoms of schizophrenia. These findings conflict with the review that led to the current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines suggesting that arts therapies may be an effective treatment for negative symptoms.Future workDetermining whether or not this lack of effectiveness extends to all types of art therapies would be informative.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN842165587.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 11. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. e030912 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Moncrieff ◽  
Glyn Lewis ◽  
Nick Freemantle ◽  
Sonia Johnson ◽  
Thomas R E Barnes ◽  
...  

IntroductionAntipsychotic medication is effective in reducing acute symptoms of psychosis, but it has a range of potentially serious and debilitating adverse effects and is often disliked by patients. It is therefore essential it is only used when benefits outweigh harms. Although multiple trials conducted with people with schizophrenia indicate an increased risk of relapse in the short-term following abrupt antipsychotic discontinuation, there is little evidence about the long-term outcome of a gradual process of reduction and discontinuation on social functioning, relapse and other outcomes.Methods and analysisThis is a multicentre, randomised controlled trial involving people with schizophrenia and related disorders who have had more than one episode. Participants are randomised to have a clinically-supervised, gradual reduction of antipsychotic medication, leading to discontinuation when possible, or to continue with maintenance treatment. Blinded follow-up assessments are conducted at 6, 12 and 24 months and the primary outcome is social functioning, measured by the Social Functioning Scale at 24 months. A minimum of 134 evaluable participants provides 90% power to detect a five-point difference, and 206 to detect a four-point difference. Secondary outcomes include severe relapse (admission to hospital) and the study is also intended to detect a minimum 10% difference in severe relapse, which requires 402 participants, assuming a 15% loss to follow-up. Other secondary outcomes include all relapses, as identified by an independent and blinded endpoint committee, symptoms measured by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, quality of life, adverse effects, self-rated recovery and neuropsychological measures. Enrolment started in 2016. The trial is scheduled to finish in June 2022.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was initially obtained on 27 October 2016 (UK Research Ethics Committee reference 16/LO/1507). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated to the public.Trial registration numberISRCTN90298520. EudraCT: 2016-000709-36. Pre-results.


2017 ◽  
Vol 47 (12) ◽  
pp. 2081-2096 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. T. Chien ◽  
D. Bressington ◽  
A. Yip ◽  
T. Karatzias

BackgroundWe aimed to test a mindfulness-based psychoeducation group (MBPEG), v. a conventional psychoeducation group (CPEG) v. treatment as usual (TAU), in patients with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders over a 24-month follow-up.MethodThis single-blind, multi-site, pragmatic randomized controlled trial was conducted in six community treatment facilities across three countries (Hong Kong, mainland China and Taiwan). Patients were randomly allocated to one of the treatment conditions, and underwent 6 months of treatment. The primary outcomes were changes in duration of re-hospitalizations and mental state (Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale; PANSS) between baseline and 1 week, and 6, 12 and 18 months post-treatment.ResultsA total of 300 patients in each country were assessed for eligibility between October 2013 and 30 April 2014, 38 patients per country (n = 342) were assigned to each treatment group and included in the intention-to-treat analysis. There was a significant difference in the length of re-hospitalizations between the three groups over 24 months (F2,330 = 5.23, p = 0.005), with MBPEG participants having a shorter mean duration of re-hospitalizations than those in the other groups. The MBPEG and CPEG participants had significant differential changes in proportional odds ratios of complete remission (all individual PANSS items <3) over the 24-month follow-up (37 and 26%, respectively), as opposed to only 7.2% of the TAU group (χ2 = 8.9 and 8.0, p = 0.001 and 0.003, relative risk = 3.5 and 3.1, 95% confidence interval 2.0–7.2 and 1.6–6.3).ConclusionsCompared with TAU and CPEG, MBPEG improves remission and hospitalization rates of people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders over 24 months.


2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S47-S48
Author(s):  
Javier-David Lopez-Morinigo ◽  
Adela Sánchez Escribano-Martínez ◽  
Verónica González Ruiz-Ruano ◽  
Laura Mata-Iturralde ◽  
Sergio Sánchez-Alonso ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Insight in schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD) has been linked with positive outcomes. However, the effect size of previous treatments on insight has been relatively small to date. The metacognitive basis of insight in SSD has led to speculation that metacognitive training (MCT) may improve insight and clinical outcomes in SSD. Methods Design: Single-center, assessor-blind, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial (RCT). Sample: Participants are recruited from the outpatient clinic of Hospital Universitario Fundación Jiménez Díaz (Madrid, Spain) over June-December 2019. Inclusion criteria: i) age: 18–64 years, both inclusive, at the study inception; ii) diagnosis: SSD based on the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (Sheehan et al., 1998) and iii) IQ&gt;70 according to the Wechsler Adults Intelligence Scale-IV (Wechsler, 1981). Those with organic and drugs-induced psychosis, poor level of Spanish and/or lack of cooperativeness are excluded. Intervention: Participants are randomised to receive eight weekly group sessions of MCT or group psychoeducation (PSE) and they will be assessed at: T0) at baseline; T1) after treatment and T2) at 1-year follow-up, although follow-up data are not available yet. Co-primary outcome measures: clinical and cognitive insight dimensions, which will be measured by the Schedule for Assessment of Insight (Expanded version) (SAI-E) (Kemp & David, 1997), and the Beck Cognitive Insight Scale (BCIS) (Beck et al., 2004), respectively. Secondary outcome measures: i)Symptom severity-Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (Kay et al., 1987); ii)Functioning-General Assessment of Functioning (Endicott et al., 1976), World Health Organization Disability Scale (WHO, 2012) and Satisfaction Life Domains Scale (Carlson et al., 2009), and only at follow-up (T2) iii)Suicidal Behaviour and iv) Hospitalizations. Power calculations: To reach a power of β=80% and detect a between-group difference of two points on the SAI-E total scores, which is considered to be clinically meaningful -effect size of 0.33-, the estimated sample size at the end of the study is n=126. Statistics: Student’s T-test and Mann-Whitney U tests were used as appropriate to compare between-group differences before- and after-treatment, i.e., the changes from baseline to post-treatment scores. The protocol of the study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04104347). Results n=49 subjects have been assessed at baseline so far (26 males, age: 47.0±10.2 years, diagnosis of schizophrenia -F20-ICD10-, n=36, 73.5%). Fifteen individuals (MCT: n=8; controls: n=7) have completed the treatment and the post-treatment assessment (T1). ‘After-treatment-T1 - baseline-T0’ scores difference means/medians between-group differences (MCT vs. PSE) were: SAI-E total insight 1.00 vs. -2.00, p=0.050; SAI-E illness awareness 0.62±2.20 vs. -0.43±1.62, p=0.316; SAI-E symptom relabelling 0.37±3.38 vs. -1.86±2.34, p=0.167; SAI-E treatment compliance 0.00 vs. 0.00, p&gt;0.05,ns; BCIS self-reflectiveness 0.50±3.78 vs. -1.43±2.22, p=0.259, BCIS self-certainty 1.62±2.97 vs. 0.00±2.44, p=0.298 and BCIS Composite Index -1.13±5.62 vs. -2.17±3.49, p=0.698. Discussion This is the first RCT testing the effect of group MCT on insight (as primary outcome) in a sample of unselected patients with SSD in comparison with psychoeducation. Two main findings emerged from the results. First, MCT appears to improve clinical and cognitive insight in SSD. Second, MCT was shown to be superior to PSE in changing insight. Whether the above MCT-related insight improvement is maintained at longer-term and whether this has an impact on clinical and social outcomes are yet to be established, which will be properly looked at in this trial.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document