scholarly journals Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of strengths model case management (SMCM) with Chinese mental health service users in Hong Kong

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. e026399 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samson Tse ◽  
Sau Man Catalina Ng ◽  
Wing Yan Winnie Yuen ◽  
Sadaaki Fukui ◽  
Richard J Goscha ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
Hong Kong ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Case Management ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Service Users ◽  
Model Case ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
The University

IntroductionStrengths-based approaches mobilise individual and environmental resources that can facilitate the recovery of people with mental illness. Strengths model case management (SMCM), developed by Rapp and Goscha through collaborative efforts at the University of Kansas, offers a structured and innovative intervention. As evidence of the effectiveness of strengths-based interventions come from Western studies, which lacked rigorous research design or failed to assure fidelity to the model, we aim to fill these gaps and conduct a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to test the effectiveness of SMCM for individuals with mental illness in Hong Kong.Methods and analysisThis will be an RCT of SMCM. Assuming a medium intervention effect (Cohen’s d=0.60) with 30% missing data (including dropouts), 210 service users aged 18 years or above will be recruited from three community mental health centres. They will be randomly assigned to SMCM groups (intervention) or SMILE groups (control) in a 1:1 ratio. The SMCM groups will receive strengths model interventions from case workers, whereas the SMILE groups will receive generic care from case workers with an attention placebo. The case workers will all be embedded in the community centres and will be required to provide a session with service users in both groups at least once every fortnight. There will be two groups of case workers for the intervention and control groups, respectively. The effectiveness of the SMCM will be compared between the two groups of service users with outcomes at baseline, 6 and 12 months after recruitment. Functional outcomes will also be reported by case workers. Data on working alliances and goal attainment will be collected from individual case workers. Qualitative evaluation will be conducted to identify the therapeutic ingredients and conditions leading to positive outcomes. Trained outcome assessors will be blind to the group allocation.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval from the Human Research Ethics Committee at the University of Hong Kong has been obtained (HRECNCF: EA1703078). The results will be disseminated to service users and their families via the media, to healthcare professionals via professional training and meetings and to researchers via conferences and publications.Trial registration number12617001435370; Pre-results.

scholarly journals Study protocol for a controlled trial of Strengths Model Case Management in mental health services in Hong Kong

BMJ Open ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (10) ◽  
pp. e008303 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wing-See Emily Tsoi ◽  
Samson Tse ◽  
Sadaaki Fukui ◽  
Steven Jones
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Hong Kong ◽  
Mental Health Services ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Case Management ◽  
Study Protocol ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Model Case

scholarly journals Family Talk versus usual services in improving child and family psychosocial functioning in families with parental mental illness (PRIMERA—Promoting Research and Innovation in Mental hEalth seRvices for fAmilies and children): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mairead Furlong ◽  
Sinead McGilloway ◽  
Christine Mulligan ◽  
Colm McGuinness ◽  
Nuala Whelan
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Psychosocial Functioning ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Parental Mental Illness ◽  
Research And Innovation ◽  
Mental Health Settings ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background Parental mental illness is common and can lead to dependent children incurring a high risk of developing mental disorders, physical illness, and impaired educational and occupational outcomes. Family Talk is one of the better known interventions designed to prevent the intergenerational transmission of mental illness. However, its evidence base is small, with few robust independent randomised controlled trials, and no associated process or cost evaluations. The PRIMERA (Promoting Research and Innovation in Mental hEalth seRvices for fAmilies and children) research programme involves a mixed method evaluation of Family Talk which is being delivered in mental health settings in Ireland to improve child and family psychosocial functioning in families with parental mental illness. Methods The study comprises a multi-centre, randomised controlled trial (RCT), with nested economic and process evaluations, to assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness and implementation mechanisms of Family Talk compared to usual services. The study is being conducted in 15 adult and child mental health settings in Ireland. Families with a parent with mental illness, and children aged 5–18 years (n = 144 families) will be randomised to either the 7-session Family Talk programme (n = 96) or to standard care (n = 48) using a 2:1 allocation ratio. The primary outcomes are child psychosocial functioning and family functioning. Secondary outcomes are as follows: understanding and experience of parental mental illness, parental mental health, child and parental resilience, partner wellbeing and service utilisation. Blind assessments will take place at pre-intervention and at 6- and 12-month follow-up. Discussion Given the prevalence and burden of intergenerational mental illness, it is imperative that prevention through evidence-based interventions becomes a public health priority. The current study will provide an important contribution to the international evidence base for Family Talk whilst also helping to identify key implementation lessons in the scaling up of Family Talk, and other similar interventions, within routine mental health settings. Trial registration ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN13365858. Registered 5th February 2019.

scholarly journals Protocol for a randomised controlled trial of interventions to promote adoption and maintenance of physical activity in adults with mental illness

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (9) ◽  
pp. e023460 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justin J Chapman ◽  
Shuichi Suetani ◽  
Dan Siskind ◽  
Steve Kisely ◽  
Michael Breakspear ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Physical Activity ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Community Dwelling ◽  
Exercise Interventions ◽  
Supervised Exercise ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Adults With Mental Illness

IntroductionPhysical activity (PA) has diverse benefits for physical and mental health and can reduce symptoms of mental illness. Adults with mental illness face practical, psychosocial and socioeconomic barriers to adopting and maintaining PA, and it is unclear how to effectively promote PA in this group. Supervised exercise interventions provide high support but may not promote autonomous motivation, which is important for PA maintenance. The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of two interventions to promote PA in adults with mental illness.Methods and analysisThis is a randomised controlled trial of two interventions to promote PA: (1) supervised exercise and gym membership and (2) motivational discussions and self-monitoring of PA using fitness trackers. The intervention duration is 16 weeks, including 8 weeks of weekly supervised group sessions, and 8 weeks of access to the gym or fitness tracker unsupervised. Participants are community-dwelling adults recruited from outpatient clinics of public mental health services. The primary outcome is PA adoption assessed using GENEActiv accelerometers worn continuously over 8 weeks. Secondary outcomes measured at baseline, postintervention (8 weeks) and follow-up (16 weeks), include exercise motivation, psychological distress and self-reported PA assessed using self-administered questionnaires and indicators of physical health measured by a researcher blinded to allocation (blood pressure, weight, waist circumference, 6 min walk test). Participant experiences will be assessed using qualitative focus groups with analysis informed by a theoretical model of behaviour (COM-B).Ethics and disseminationEthics approval has been obtained from the Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital (HREC/17/QRBW/302). We plan to submit a manuscript on protocol development from pilot work, and a manuscript of the results to a peer-reviewed journal. Results will be presented at conferences, community and consumer forums and hospital grand rounds.Trial registration numberACTRN12617001017314; Pre-results.

Effectiveness of health checks to improve the physical health of people with severe mental illness in secondary care: A single blind cluster randomised controlled trial

2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. S390-S391
Author(s):  
J. White ◽  
J. Lucas ◽  
L. Swift ◽  
G. Barton ◽  
G. Harriet ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Physical Health ◽  
Secondary Care ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Health Checks ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Single Blind

IntroductionAnnual monitoring of physical health of people with severe mental illness (SMI) in primary or secondary care is recommended in England.ObjectiveThe SMI Health Improvement Profile (HIP) was developed to target physical well-being in SMI through the role of the mental health nurse.AimThe primary aim was to investigate if health checks performed by community mental health nurses (CMHNs) trained to use the HIP improved the physical well-being of patients with SMI at 12 months.MethodsA single blind, parallel group randomised controlled trial of training to use the HIP (clustered at the level of the nurse). Physical well-being was measured in study patients using the physical component score of the SF36v2 at baseline and at 12 months.ResultsSixty CMHNs (working with 173 patients) were assigned to the HIP programme (training to use the HIP) or treatment as usual. The HIP was completed with 38 (42%) patients at baseline and 22 (24%) at follow-up in the HIP programme group. No effect of the HIP programme on physical health-related quality of life of study patients was identified, a finding supported by per protocol analyses.ConclusionsThis study found no evidence that CMHN delivered health checks following training to use the HIP are effective at improving the physical well-being of SMI patients at one year. More attention to methods that aim to enable the delivery, receipt and enactment of evidence-based interventions to improve physical health outcomes in this population is urgently required.ISRCTN: 41137900.Disclosure of interestThe authors have not supplied their declaration of competing interest.

scholarly journals Effects of biomedical messages and expert-recommended messages on reducing mental health-related stigma: a randomised controlled trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yasutaka Ojio ◽  
Sosei Yamaguchi ◽  
Kazusa Ohta ◽  
Shuntaro Ando ◽  
Shinsuke Koike
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Useful Knowledge ◽  
Post Test ◽  
Related Stigma ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Aims Mental health-related stigma is a major challenge associated with the huge mental health treatment gap. It has remained unclear what kind of educational content is effective in reducing the stigma. Whether biomedical messages (BMM) about mental illness are effective or harmful in decreasing stigma is controversial. To investigate whether BMM can improve practically useful knowledge of mental illness, comparably to recommended messages (RCM) advocated by experts, of types such as ‘recovery-oriented’, ‘social inclusion/human rights’ and ‘high prevalence of mental illnesses’ through a randomised controlled trial (RCT). Method This study is an individual-level RCT with a parallel-group design over 1 year, conducted in Tokyo, Japan. A total of 179 participants (males n = 80, mean age = 21.9 years and s.d. = 7.8) were recruited in high schools and universities, and through a commercial internet advertisement in June and July 2017, without any indication that the study appertained to mental health. Participants were allocated to the BMM and RCM groups. They underwent a 10-min intervention, and completed self-report questionnaires during baseline, post-test, 1-month follow-up and 1-year follow-up surveys. The primary outcome measures were practically useful knowledge of mental illness at the post-test survey using the Mental Illness and Disorder Understanding Scale (MIDUS). Analysis was conducted in October 2018. Results Both groups demonstrated improved MIDUS score in the post-test survey, and showed similar intervention effects (F(1, 177) = 160.5, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.48). The effect of the interventions continued until the 1-year follow-up survey (B [95% CI] = −2.56 [−4.27, −0.85], p < 0.01), and showed no difference between groups. The reported adverse effect that BMM increase stigma was not confirmed. Conclusions BMM may have a positive impact on stigma, comparable to RCM. These findings may encourage reconsideration of the content of messages about mental health, as it is indicated that combining BMM and RCM might contribute to an effective anti-stigma programme.

scholarly journals Peer support for people with severe mental illness versus usual care in high-, middle- and low-income countries: study protocol for a pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial (UPSIDES-RCT)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Galia Sharon Moran ◽  
Jasmine Kalha ◽  
Annabel Mueller-Stierlin ◽  
Reinhold Kilian ◽  
Silvia Krumm ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Peer Support ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Social Inclusion ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Low Income Countries ◽  
Service Users ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background: Peer support is an established intervention involving a person recovering from mental illness to support others with mental illness.. Peers are an under-used resource in global mental health. Building upon comprehensive formative research, this study will rigorously evaluate the impact of peer support at multiple levels, including: service user outcomes (psychosocial and clinical); peer support worker outcomes (work role, empowerment); service outcomes (cost-effectiveness, return on investment); and implementation outcomes (adoption, sustainability, organisational change). Methods: UPSIDES-RCT is a pragmatic parallel-group multi-centre randomised controlled trial assessing the effectiveness of UPSIDES at four measurement points over one year (baseline, 4-, 8-, and 12-month follow-up), with embedded process evaluation and cost-effectiveness analysis. Research will take place in a range of high-, middle- and low-income countries (Germany, United Kingdom, Israel, India, Uganda, Tanzania). The primary outcome is social inclusion of service users with severe mental illness (N= 558; N = 93 per site) at 8-month follow-up, measured with the Social Inclusion Scale. Secondary outcomes include empowerment (Empowerment Scale), hope (HOPE scale), recovery (Stages of Recovery), and health and social functioning (Health of the Nations Outcome Scales). Mixed-methods process evaluation will investigate mediators and moderators of effect, and implementation experiences of four UPSIDES stakeholder groups (service users, peer support workers, mental health workers, policy makers). A cost-effectiveness analysis examining cost-utility and health budget impact will estimate the value for money of UPSIDES peer support. Discussion: The UPSIDES-RCT will explore the essential components necessary to create a peer support model in mental health care, while providing the evidence required to sustain and eventually scale-up the intervention in different cultural, organisational and resource settings. By actively involving and empowering service users, UPSIDES will move mental health systems toward a recovery orientation, emphasising user-centeredness, community participation, and the realisation of mental health as a human right.

scholarly journals Peer support for people with severe mental illness versus usual care: study protocol for a pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial (UPSIDES-RCT)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Galia Sharon Moran ◽  
Jasmine Kalha ◽  
Annabel Mueller-Stierlin ◽  
Reinhold Kilian ◽  
Silvia Krumm ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Severe Mental Illness ◽  
Peer Support ◽  
Social Inclusion ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Service Users ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background: Peer support is an established intervention involving a person in recovery from mental illness being engaged to offering support to others with mental illness. Peers are an under-used resource in global mental health. Building upon comprehensive formative research, this study will rigorously evaluate the impact of peer support at the levels of service users (psychosocial and clinical outcomes), peer support workers (work role, empowerment), services (cost-effectiveness, return on investment), and implementation (adoption, sustainability, organisational change). Methods: UPSIDES-RCT is a pragmatic parallel-group multi-centre randomised controlled trial assessing the effectiveness of UPSIDES at four measurement points over one year (baseline, 4-, 8-, and 12-month follow-up), and embedded process evaluation and cost-effectiveness analysis. Research will take place in a range of high-, middle- and low-income countries (Germany, United Kingdom, Israel, Uganda, Tanzania, India). The primary outcome is social inclusion of service users with severe mental illness (N= 558; N = 93 per site) at 8-month follow-up, measured with the Social Inclusion Scale. Secondary outcomes include empowerment (Empowerment Scale), hope (HOPE scale), recovery (Stages of Recovery), and health and social functioning (Health of the Nations Outcome Scales). Mixed-methods process evaluation will investigate mediators and moderators of effect, and implementation experiences of four UPSIDES stakeholder groups (service users, peer support workers, mental health workers, and policy makers). A cost-effectiveness analysis examining cost-utility and health budget impact will estimate the value for money of UPSIDES peer support. Discussion: By implementing and evaluating a manualized peer support intervention for people with severe mental illness across low-, middle-, and high-income countries, this study will contribute to harmonising core elements of peer support across different cultural and organisational dimensions. The UPSIDES-RCT will explore the essential components necessary to create a peer support model in mental health care, while providing the evidence required to sustain and eventually scale-up the intervention. Performance of mental health services will be maximised by actively involving and empowering service users, generating system changes towards user-centeredness, recovery orientation, community participation, and realising mental health as a human right. Trail registration: ISRCTN, ISRCTN26008944. Registered 30 October 2019, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN26008944.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document