Search

This article describes a Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) led creative workshop space held within a clinical trial of a talking therapy for distressing voices (AVATAR2). PPI adds significant value to clinical research and ensures the work is meaningful to patients and their supporters. However, known issues include tokenism, a common power imbalance between PPI colleagues and researchers and a lack of opportunity for PPI to shape the research. PPI has played a key role at all stages of the AVATAR2 trial, including design, recruitment of staff and participants, data collection, analysis, and dissemination. An active and creative group of people was established, with over 30 members flexibly involved across all four sites. PPI group members were from diverse backgrounds, with lived experience of mental health conditions and recovery, and including carers. During this work, PPI colleagues identified that they would value a creative space which would help to promote the study but extend beyond an exclusive focus on trial deliverables. A regular creative workshop was established to support PPI colleagues in their creative work, including material such as poetry, blogs, art and podcasts. PPI colleagues and trial staff have cowritten a reflective piece to share their experiences on the impact of the creative workshops, organised into four themes. We found the workshops to be a powerful tool for forging relationships among trial staff and PPI colleagues, while also fostering personal development. We reflected on how the workshops built up the confidence of attendees and supported demanding trial activities such as public speaking. Finally, we discussed the impact of the workshops on wider trial culture, by upholding the values of the team and challenging the status quo., Competing Interests: Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate The work outlined here was carried out as part of the PPI programme in the trial, and not as ethically approved research. As all contributors are authors no ethical approval was necessary. Consent for publication Not applicable. Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objective: Bullying has consistently been highlighted as a risk factor for youth self-harm. Less is known about associations by bullying sub-type (i.e., physical, verbal, relational, cyberbullying), among boys and girls in diverse urban populations. This study aimed to explore: (1) prevalence of bullying and lifetime self-harm; (2) cross-sectional associations between bullying and self-harm. Both aims investigated bullying sub-types and the role of sex., Method: Baseline data on bullying victimization and lifetime self-harm were drawn from REACH (Resilience, Ethnicity and AdolesCent Mental Health), an accelerated cohort study of adolescent mental health in London, United Kingdom. Data on baseline self-harm and sex were available for 3,060 adolescents aged 11-14 years ( M age =12.4, 50.6% girls, >80% ethnic minority groups) from 10 schools., Results: Prevalence of bullying in the past six months was 22.3% and lifetime self-harm was 16.9%. Both were more common in girls than boys (adjusted risk ratios: bullying, 1.13 [1.02,1.25]; self-harm, 1.45 [1.03,1.86]). By bullying sub-type, prevalence estimates ranged from 4.1% (cyberbullying) to 16.6% (physical bullying). Bullying was associated with self-harm (aRR 3.35 [2.89,3.82]) for both girls (aRR 3.61 [3.07,4.14]) and boys (aRR 2.96 [2.27,3.65]), independent of sex, age, free school meals and ethnic group. All sub-types were associated with self-harm (aRRs 3.16-4.34), for girls and boys., Conclusions: These baseline findings underline the importance of exploring nuances between bullying sub-types and self-harm, by sex or gender.

Background: Enduring ethnic inequalities exist in mental healthcare. The COVID-19 pandemic has widened these., Aims: To explore stakeholder perspectives on how the COVID-19 pandemic has increased ethnic inequalities in mental healthcare., Method: A qualitative interview study of four areas in England with 34 patients, 15 carers and 39 mental health professionals from National Health Service (NHS) and community organisations (July 2021 to July 2022). Framework analysis was used to develop a logic model of inter-relationships between pre-pandemic barriers and COVID-19 impacts., Results: Impacts were largely similar across sites, with some small variations (e.g. positive service impacts of higher ethnic diversity in area 2). Pre-pandemic barriers at individual level included mistrust and thus avoidance of services and at a service level included the dominance of a monocultural model, leading to poor communication, disengagement and alienation. During the pandemic remote service delivery, closure of community organisations and media scapegoating exacerbated existing barriers by worsening alienation and communication barriers, fuelling prejudice and division, and increasing mistrust in services. Some minority ethnic patients reported positive developments, experiencing empowerment through self-determination and creative activities., Conclusions: During the COVID-19 pandemic some patients showed resilience and developed adaptations that could be nurtured by services. However, there has been a reduction in the availability of group-specific NHS and third-sector services in the community, exacerbating pre-existing barriers. As these developments are likely to have long-term consequences for minority ethnic groups' engagement with mental healthcare, they need to be addressed as a priority by the NHS and its partners.

Introduction: Associations between structural inequalities and health are well established. However, there is limited work examining this link in relation to mental health, or that centres public perspectives. This study explores people's experience and sense-making of inequality in their daily lives, with particular consideration of impacts on mental health., Methods: We conducted a peer research study. Participants had to live in one of two London Boroughs and have an interest in inequalities and mental health. Using social media, newsletters, local organisations and our peer researchers' contacts, we recruited 30 participants who took photos representing their experience of inequality and discussed them during semi-structured interviews. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis., Results: Three themes were identified in this study: (1) inequalities are unjust, multilayered and intertwined with mental health. Accounts demonstrated a deep understanding of inequalities and their link to mental health outcomes, describing inequalities as 'suffering' and 'not good for anyone'. Financial, housing, immigration and healthcare problems exacerbated poor mental health, with racism, gender-based violence and job loss also contributing factors for both poor mental health and experiences of inequality; (2) inequalities exclude and have far-reaching mental health consequences, impacting personal sense of belonging and perceived societal value and (3) moving forwards-addressing long-standing inequality and poor public mental health necessitated coping and resilience strategies that are often unacknowledged and undervalued by support systems., Conclusion: Lived experience expertise was central in this study, creating an innovative methodological approach. To improve public mental health, we must address the everyday, painful structural inequalities experienced by many as commonplace and unfair. New policies and strategies must be found that involve communities, redistributing resources and power, building on a collective knowledge base, to coproduce actions combatting inequalities and improving population mental health., Patient or Public Contribution: This study was peer-led, designed and carried out by researchers who had experiences of poor mental health. Six authors of the paper worked as peer researchers on this study., (© 2023 The Authors. Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Mental health problems bring substantial individual, community and societal costs and the need for innovation to promote good mental health and to prevent and treat mental health problems has never been greater. However, we know that research findings can take up to 20 years to implement. One way to push the pace is to focus researchers and funders on shared, specific goals and targets. We describe a consultation process organised by the Department of Health and Social Care and convened by the Chief Medical Officer to consider high level goals for future research efforts and to begin to identify UK-specific targets to measure research impact. The process took account of new scientific methods and evidence, the UK context with a universal health care system (the NHS) and the embedded research support from the National Institute for Health Research Clinical Research Network, as well as the views of individual service users and service user organisations. The result of the consultation is a set of four overarching goals with the potential to be measured at intervals of three, five or ten years.

Background: Maintenance antipsychotic medication is recommended for people with schizophrenia or recurrent psychosis, but the adverse effects are burdensome, and evidence on long-term outcomes is sparse. We aimed to assess the benefits and harms of a gradual process of antipsychotic reduction compared with maintenance treatment. Our hypothesis was that antipsychotic reduction would improve social functioning with a short-term increase in relapse., Methods: RADAR was an open, parallel-group, randomised trial done in 19 National Health Service Trusts in England. Participants were aged 18 years and older, had a diagnosis of recurrent, non-affective psychotic disorder, and were prescribed an antipsychotic. Exclusion criteria included people who had a mental health crisis or hospital admission in the past month, were considered to pose a serious risk to themselves or others by a treating clinician, or were mandated to take antipsychotic medication under the Mental Health Act. Through an independent, internet-based system, participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to gradual, flexible antipsychotic reduction, overseen by treating clinicians, or to maintenance. Participants and clinicians were aware of treatment allocations, but assessors were masked to them. Follow-up was for 2 years. Social functioning, assessed by the Social Functioning Scale, was the primary outcome. The principal secondary outcome was severe relapse, defined as requiring admission to hospital. Analysis was done blind to group identity using intention-to-treat data. The trial is completed and has been registered with ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN90298520) and with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03559426)., Findings: 4157 people were screened, of whom 253 were randomly allocated, including 168 (66%) men, 82 (32%) women, and 3 (1%) transgender people, with a mean age of 46 years (SD 12, range 22-79). 171 (67%) participants were White, 52 (21%) were Black, 16 (6%) were Asian, and 12 (5%) were of other ethnicity. The median dose reduction at any point during the trial was 67% in the reduction group and zero in the maintenance group; at 24 months it was 33% versus zero. At the 24-month follow-up, we assessed 90 of 126 people assigned to the antipsychotic dose reduction group and 94 of 127 assigned to the maintenance group, finding no difference in the Social Functioning Scale (β 0·19, 95% CI -1·94 to 2·33; p=0·86). There were 93 serious adverse events in the reduction group affecting 49 individuals, mainly comprising admission for a mental health relapse, and 64 in the maintenance group, relating to 29 individuals., Interpretation: At 2-year follow-up, a gradual, supported process of antipsychotic dose reduction had no effect on social functioning. Our data can help to inform decisions about the use of long-term antipsychotic medication., Funding: National Institute for Health Research., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests JM has grants from National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) and is a co-applicant on grants from the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF) in Australia. She receives royalties from six books about psychiatric drugs, she has received lecture fees from Alberta Psychiatric Association, British Psychological Association, Universite de Sherbrooke, Case Western Reserve University, and University of Basal. She is co-chair person of the Critical Psychiatry Network and a board member of the Council for Evidence-based Psychiatry (both unpaid roles). RC is an unpaid Board Member of the International Institute for Psychiatric Drug Withdrawal (IIPDW), has undertaken paid work for the All Party Parliamentary Group for Prescribed Drug Dependence, and is a member of the Advisory Board for the PARTANE Study (a paid role). NF has grants from NIHR, Medical Research Council, Cure Parkinson's Trust, and the EU. He has received consulting fees from ALK, Sanofi Avantis, Gedeo Richter, Abbott, Galderma, Astra Zeneca, Ipsen, Vertex, Thea, Novo Nordisk, and Aimmune, speaker fees from Abbott Singapore, and been paid to sit on a data safety monitoring or advisory board by Orion. GL is chair of an NIHR-funded trial steering committee. SJ has grants from NIHR and UK Research and Innovation. She is chair of programme advisory committees for two studies funded through NIHR Programme Grants and has acted as a paid reviewer of grant applications for programmes on social interventions for Austrian foundation–Wiener Wissenschafts-, Forschungs- und Technologiefonds (Vienna Science and Technology Fund). TB is joint head of the Prescribing Observatory for Mental Health, Royal College of Psychiatrists. MH is co-applicant on grants from the MRFF in Australia, he has received consulting fees from Outro Health, a digital clinic aimed to support people to stop unnecessary antidepressants, lecture fees from National Health Service Trusts for grand rounds presentations, Salomon's University and University of Washington. He sits on the data safety monitoring board of the RELEASE trial in Australia, and is a co-founder of Outro Health. He is a member of the Critical Psychiatry Network and IIPDW (both unpaid roles). SP has grants from NIHR. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: New treatments are needed for people with treatment-resistant depression (TRD), who do not benefit from anti-depressants and many of whom do not recover fully with psychological treatments. The Community Navigator programme was co-produced with service users and practitioners. It is a novel social intervention which aims to reduce loneliness and thus improve health outcomes for people with TRD. Participants receive up to 10 individual meetings with a Community Navigator, who helps them to map their social world and set and enact goals to enhance their social connections and reduce loneliness. Participants may also access group meet-ups with others in the programme every 2 months, and may be offered modest financial support to enable activities to support social connections., Methods: A researcher-blind, multi-site, 1:1 randomised controlled trial with N = 306 participants will test the effectiveness of the Community Navigator programme for people with TRD in secondary community mental health teams (CMHTs). Our primary hypothesis is that people who are offered the Community Navigator programme as an addition to usual CMHT care will be less depressed, assessed using the PHQ-9 self-report measure, at 8-month, end-of-treatment follow-up, compared to a control group receiving usual CMHT care and a booklet with information about local social groups and activities. We will follow participants up at end-of-treatment and at 14 months, 6 months after end-of-treatment follow-up. Secondary outcomes include the following: loneliness, anxiety, personal recovery, self-efficacy, social network, social identities. We will collect data about health-related quality of life and service use to investigate the cost-effectiveness of the Community Navigator programme., Discussion: This trial will provide definitive evidence about the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Community Navigator programme and whether it can be recommended for use in practice. The trial is due to finish in August 2025., Trial Registration: Prospectively registered on 8th July 2022 at: ISRCTN13205972., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Recent evidence suggests that it remains difficult for academic researchers to preserve global well-being when working in the UK higher education sector. Our study aimed to explore academic researchers' perspectives on how they feel their mental health and well-being could be better supported within the UK higher education system. Using a combination of semi-structured and narrative interviewing techniques, we gathered the perspectives of 26 researchers. Narrative and reflexive thematic analysis were then used on the data collected. Our findings highlight the need to tackle systemic issues such job insecurity and unrealistically high workloads, given the risk they can pose to researchers' mental health and well-being. Our findings also highlight the key influence of managers and supervisors in creating a supportive environment, and the importance of going beyond what support is offered. That is, it is vital to effectively promote any existing or emerging support systems, and to be proactive in offering this support. Given the diversity identified in researchers' individual situations, it is important that support is flexible and takes into consideration individual requirements and preferences. Higher education authorities and institutions need to determine how they can foster a healthy, caring environment for researchers working in this sector going forwards., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (© 2023 The Authors.)

Background: Long-standing ethnic inequalities in access and mental healthcare were worsened by the COVID-19 pandemic., Objectives: Stakeholders coproduced local and national implementation plans to improve mental healthcare for people from minority ethnic groups., Methods: Experience-based codesign conducted in four areas covered by National Health Service (NHS) mental health trusts: Coventry and Warwickshire, Greater Manchester, East London and Sheffield. Data were analysed using an interpretivist-constructivist approach, seeking validation from participants on their priority actions and implementation plans. Service users (n=29), carers (n=9) and health professionals (n=33) took part in interviews; focus groups (service users, n=15; carers, n=8; health professionals, n=24); and codesign workshops (service users, n=15; carers, n=5; health professionals, n=21) from July 2021 to July 2022., Findings: Each study site identified 2-3 local priority actions. Three were consistent across areas: (1) reaching out to communities and collaborating with third sector organisations; (2) diversifying the mental healthcare offer to provide culturally appropriate therapeutic approaches and (3) enabling open discussions about ethnicity, culture and racism. National priority actions included: (1) co-ordination of a national hub to bring about system level change and (2) recognition of the centrality of service users and communities in the design and provision of services., Conclusions: Stakeholder-led implementation plans highlight that substantial change is needed to increase equity in mental healthcare in England., Clinical Implications: Working with people with lived experience in leadership roles, and collaborations between NHS and community organisations will be essential. Future research avenues include comparison of the benefits of culturally specific versus generic therapeutic interventions., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. Published by BMJ.)

Adolescents often look to their peers for emotional support, so it is critical that they are prepared to take on a supportive role, especially during a health crisis. Using a randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN99248812, 28/05/2020), we tested the short-term efficacy of an online training programme to equip young people with skills to support to their peers' mental wellbeing during the COVID-19 pandemic. In June 2020, one-hundred UK adolescents (aged 16-18) recruited through social media were randomly allocated (1:1) to immediate 5-day peer support training or a wait-list, via an independently generated allocation sequence. Primary outcomes were indicators of ability to help others (motivation, perceived skills, frequency of help provided, compassion to others and connectedness to peers). Secondary outcomes included emotional symptoms, mental wellbeing, and indicators of agency (civic engagement and self-efficacy). We also collected qualitative reports of participants' experience. Assessments were completed at baseline and 1 week post randomisation (primary endpoint), and up to 4 weeks post randomisation (training group only). The training increased support-giving skills, frequency of providing support, compassion and peer connectedness (medium-large-effect sizes), but not motivation to provide support, 1 week post randomisation, compared to controls. Gains in the training group were maintained 4 weeks post randomisation. Training also improved adolescents' mental health and agency, and qualitative reports revealed further positive outcomes including increased self-care and empowerment. Leveraging digital platforms that are familiar to young people, peer support training has the potential to enable adolescents to support their own and their peers' mental wellbeing during a health crisis., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Individuals living with severe mental illness can have significant emotional, physical and social challenges. Collaborative care combines clinical and organisational components., Aims: We tested whether a primary care-based collaborative care model (PARTNERS) would improve quality of life for people with diagnoses of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or other psychoses, compared with usual care., Method: We conducted a general practice-based, cluster randomised controlled superiority trial. Practices were recruited from four English regions and allocated (1:1) to intervention or control. Individuals receiving limited input in secondary care or who were under primary care only were eligible. The 12-month PARTNERS intervention incorporated person-centred coaching support and liaison work. The primary outcome was quality of life as measured by the Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of Life (MANSA)., Results: We allocated 39 general practices, with 198 participants, to the PARTNERS intervention (20 practices, 116 participants) or control (19 practices, 82 participants). Primary outcome data were available for 99 (85.3%) intervention and 71 (86.6%) control participants. Mean change in overall MANSA score did not differ between the groups (intervention: 0.25, s.d. 0.73; control: 0.21, s.d. 0.86; estimated fully adjusted between-group difference 0.03, 95% CI -0.25 to 0.31; P = 0.819). Acute mental health episodes (safety outcome) included three crises in the intervention group and four in the control group., Conclusions: There was no evidence of a difference in quality of life, as measured with the MANSA, between those receiving the PARTNERS intervention and usual care. Shifting care to primary care was not associated with increased adverse outcomes.

"Epistemic injustice" refers to how people from marginalized groups are denied opportunities to create knowledge and derive meaning from their experiences. In the mental health field, epistemic injustice occurs in both research and service delivery systems and particularly impacts people from racialized communities. Lived experience involvement and leadership are often proposed as methods of combatting epistemic injustice, a tool for ensuring the views of people at the center of an issue are heard and can inform decision-making. However, this approach is not without challenges. In this paper, we draw on our work as intermediary organizations that center lived experience perspectives to challenge epistemic injustice. We highlight two problems we have identified in working in the mental health research field: "elite capture" and "epistemic exploitation". We believe that these problems are barriers to the radical and structural change required for epistemic justice to occur. We propose a pragmatic approach to addressing these issues. Based on our work we suggest three considerations for researchers and our own organizations to consider when involving people with lived experience. These include reflecting on the purpose of creating knowledge, with a focus on impact. Embedding lived experience roles, with appropriate employment, support and remuneration, and acknowledging that it may be necessary to work alongside existing systems as a "critical friend" while developing new spaces and structures for alternative forms of knowledge. Finally, the mental health research system needs to change. We believe these three considerations will help us better move toward epistemic justice in mental health research., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Okoroji, Mackay, Robotham, Beckford and Pinfold.)

Background: The Feeling Safe Programme is a cognitive therapy developed to improve outcomes for individuals with persecutory delusions. It is theoretically driven, modular and personalised, with differences in therapeutic style and content compared with first-generation cognitive behavioural therapy for psychosis., Objectives: We set out to understand the participant experience of the Feeling Safe Programme., Design: A qualitative study employing interpretative phenomenological analysis., Methods: Using a peer research approach, semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted with six people who had received the Feeling Safe Programme as part of the outcome clinical trial., Results: Participants spoke of feeling 'unsafe' in their daily lives before the intervention. Openness to the intervention, facilitated by identification with the programme name, and willingness to take an active role were considered important participant attributes for successful outcomes. The therapist was viewed as a professional friend who cared about the individual, which enabled trust to form and the opportunity to consider new knowledge and alternative perspectives. Doing difficult tasks gradually and repeatedly to become comfortable with them was important for change to occur. The intervention helped people to do ordinary things that others take for granted and was perceived to produce lasting changes., Conclusions: The Feeling Safe Programme was subjectively experienced very positively by interview participants, which is consistent with the results of the clinical trial. The successful interaction of the participant and therapist enabled trust to form, which meant that repeated practice of difficult tasks could lead to re-engagement with valued everyday activities., (© 2022 The Authors. Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The British Psychological Society.)

Background: Older adult carers of people who experience psychosis are at increased risk of developing physical and mental health problems due to the compounding factors of supporting their care-recipient and the health changes associated with ageing. Effective interventions exist but can be difficult to access and maintain prolonged engagement. Self-directed writing therapies, frequently referred to as Written Emotional Disclosure (WED), might be a suitable alternative intervention to improve the wellbeing of carers., Methods: This study aimed to determine the feasibility (recruitment, retention and primary outcome completion) and acceptability of a specific WED intervention known as Positive Written Disclosure (PWD). Informal carers of people with psychosis were randomised to PWD, neutral writing or no writing. Quantitative outcomes including positive and negative affect, carer wellbeing, quality of life, depression, anxiety, stress, self-efficacy, leisure time satisfaction as well as health care utilisation were collected at baseline, 1-, 3-, and 6-month assessments. Qualitative feedback was also collected via questionnaire and semi-structured interviews from those randomised to either writing group., Results: We successfully met our progression criteria, recruiting to target and within timeframes whilst attaining 97% retention and 84% primary outcome data completed at 6 months. Carers randomised to the positive writing group described the intervention as enabling them to have a more positive attitude and focus on activities for themselves. Both writing groups described their tasks as providing distraction from caring responsibilities. However, some carers found the narrow positive emotion focus challenging., Conclusions: PWD is a feasible and acceptable intervention for older adult carers of people with psychosis within a community setting. Further refinement of the writing protocol to include choice in type of emotion disclosed in addition to screening for some level of need may be required in future trials to reduce floor/ceiling effects of outcomes which may explain the lack of change observed., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2022 Jones et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Adolescence is a critical period for social and emotional development. We sought to examine the impacts of Covid-19 and related social restrictions and school closures on adolescent mental health, particularly among disadvantaged, marginalised, and vulnerable groups., Methods: We analysed four waves of data - 3 pre-Covid-19 (2016-2019) and 1 mid-Covid-19 (May-Aug 2020; n, 1074; 12-18 years old, >80% minority ethnic groups, 25% free school meals) from REACH (Resilience, Ethnicity, and AdolesCent Mental Health), an adolescent cohort based in inner-London, United Kingdom. Mental health was assessed using validated measures at each time point. We estimated temporal trends in mental distress and examined variations in changes in distress, pre- to mid-Covid-19, by social group, and by pre- and mid-pandemic risks., Results: We found no evidence of an overall increase in mental distress midpandemic (15.9%, 95% CI: 13.0, 19.4) compared with prepandemic (around 18%). However, there were variations in changes in mental distress by subgroups. There were modest variations by social group and by pre-Covid risks (e.g., a small increase in distress among girls (b [unstandardised beta coefficient] 0.42 [-0.19, 1.03]); a small decrease among boys (b - 0.59 [-1.37, 0.19]); p for interaction .007). The most notable variations were by midpandemic risks: that is, broadly, increases in distress among those reporting negative circumstances and impacts (e.g., in finances, housing, social support and relationships, and daily routines) and decreases in distress among those reporting positive impacts., Conclusions: We found strong evidence that mental distress increased among young people who were most negatively impacted by Covid-19 and by related social restrictions during the first lockdown in the United Kingdom., (© 2022 The Authors. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association for Child and Adolescent Mental Health.)

Background: Communication via technology is regarded as an effective way of maintaining social connection and helping individuals to cope with the psychological impact of social distancing measures during a pandemic. However, there is little information about which factors have influenced increased use of technology to communicate with others during lockdowns and whether this has changed over time., Objective: The aim of this study is to explore which psychosocial factors (eg, mental health and employment) and pandemic-related factors (eg, shielding and time) influenced an increase in communication via technology during the first lockdown in the United Kingdom., Methods: A cross-sectional, web-based survey was conducted between April and July 2020, examining thoughts, feelings, and behaviors associated with the pandemic, including communicating more using technology (eg, via messaging, phone, or video). We collected sociodemographic information, employment status, mental health service user status, and depression symptoms. We used hierarchical logistic regression to test which factors were associated with communicating more using technology during the lockdown., Results: Participants (N=1464) were on average 41.07 (SD 14.61) years old, and mostly women (n=1141; 77.9%), White (n=1265; 86.4%), and employed (n=1030; 70.4%). Participants reported a mild level of depression (mean 9.43, SD 7.02), and were communicating more using technology (n=1164; 79.5%). The hierarchical regression indicated that people who were employed and experiencing lower levels of depression were more likely to report increased communication using technology during a lockdown period of the COVID-19 pandemic, and over time, men communicated more using technology. Increased use of technology to communicate was related to greater communication and the inability to see others due to the social distancing measures enacted during the lockdown. It was not related to a general increase in technology use during the lockdown., Conclusions: Although most participants reported increased use of technology to communicate during a lockdown period of the COVID-19 pandemic, this was more apparent in the employed and those experiencing low levels of depression. Moving forward, we should continue to monitor groups who may have been excluded from the benefits of support and communication using technology., (©Erin Dawe-Lane, Magano Mutepua, Daniel Morris, Clarissa M Odoi, Emma Wilson, Joanne Evans, Vanessa Pinfold, Til Wykes, Sagar Jilka, Sara Simblett. Originally published in JMIR Mental Health (https://mental.jmir.org), 25.10.2022.)

Background: Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for psychosis (CBTp) has an established evidence base and is recommended by clinical guidelines to be offered during the acute phases of psychosis. However, few research studies have examined the efficacy of CBTp interventions specifically adapted for the acute mental health inpatient context with most research trials being conducted with white European community populations., Aims: The aim of this study is to conduct a pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT), which incorporates the examination of feasibility markers, of a crisis-focused CBTp intervention adapted for an ethnically diverse acute mental health inpatient population, in preparation for a large-scale randomised controlled trial. The study will examine the feasibility of undertaking the trial, the acceptability and safety of the intervention and the suitability of chosen outcome measures. This will inform the planning of a future, fully powered RCT., Methods: A single-site, parallel-group, pilot RCT will be conducted examining the intervention. Drawing on principles of coproduction, the intervention has been adapted in partnership with key stakeholders: service users with lived experience of psychosis and of inpatient care (including those from ethnic minority backgrounds), carers, multi-disciplinary inpatient clinicians and researchers. Sixty participants with experience of psychosis and in current receipt of acute mental health inpatient care will be recruited. Participants will be randomly allocated to either the crisis-focused CBTp intervention or treatment as usual (TAU)., Discussion: Findings of this pilot RCT will indicate whether a larger multi-site RCT is needed to investigate the efficacy of the intervention. If the initial results demonstrate that this trial is feasible and the intervention is acceptable, it will provide evidence that a full-scale effectiveness trial may be warranted., Trial Registration: This trial has been prospectively registered on the ISRCTN registry ( ISRCTN59055607 ) on the 18th of February 2021., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Introduction: This study aimed to identify research priorities for future research on screen use and adolescent mental health, from the perspectives of young people, parents/carers, and teachers., Methods: The study design was informed by the James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership approach. A three-stage consensus-based process of consultation to identify research priorities using qualitative and quantitative methods. Research was guided by a steering group comprising researchers, third sector partners, clinicians, parents/carers and young people. A Young People's Advisory Group contributed at each stage., Results: Initial steps generated 26 research questions of importance to children and young people; these were ranked by 357 participants (229 children and young people and 128 adults). Consensus was reached for the prioritization of four topics for future research: (i) the impact of exposure to adult content on young people's mental health and relationships; (ii) the relationship between screen use and the well-being of young people from vulnerable groups; (iii) the impact of screen use on brain development; and (iv) the relationship between screen use and sleep.Additionally, young participants prioritized questions about online bullying, advertisements targeting young people, and the relationship between social media and specific mental health conditions. Research topics of interest arising specifically during the pandemic included the effects on adolescent mental health of exposure to constant news updates and online racial bias, and how young people take part in activism online., Conclusion: These findings will enable researchers and funders to conduct research that is needs-oriented and relevant to the target audience., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Vera San Juan, Oram, Pinfold, Temple, Foye, Simpson, Johnson, Hardt, Abdinasir and Edbrooke-Childs.)

Background: Antipsychotic medication can reduce psychotic symptoms and risk of relapse in people with schizophrenia and related disorders, but it is not always effective and adverse effects can be significant. We know little of patients' views about continuing or discontinuing antipsychotic treatment., Aims: To explore the views of people with schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders about continuing their antipsychotic medication or attempting to reduce or discontinue this medication with clinical support., Methods: We collected quantitative and qualitative data by conducting semi-structured interviews in London, UK. Factors predicting a desire to discontinue medication were explored. Content analysis of qualitative data was undertaken., Results: We interviewed 269 participants. 33% (95% CI, 27 to 39%) were content with taking long-term antipsychotic medication. Others reported they took it reluctantly (19%), accepted it on a temporary basis (24%) or actively disliked it (18%). 31% (95% CI, 25 to 37%) said they would like to try to stop medication with professional support, and 45% (95% CI, 39 to 51%) wanted the opportunity to reduce medication. People who wanted to discontinue had more negative attitudes towards the medication but were otherwise similar to other participants. Wanting to stop or reduce medication was motivated mainly by adverse effects and health concerns. Professional support was identified as potentially helpful to achieve reduction., Conclusions: This large study reveals that patients are commonly unhappy about the idea of taking antipsychotics on a continuing or life-long basis. Professional support for people who want to try to reduce or stop medication is valued., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Candidacy, a construct describing how people's eligibility for care is negotiated between themselves and services, has received limited attention in the context of mental health care. In addition, candidacy research has only rarely studied the views of carers and health professionals. In this article, we use concepts relating to candidacy to enable a theoretically informed examination of experiences of access to secondary mental health services during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in England. We report a qualitative study of the views and experiences of service users, carers, and healthcare professionals. Analysis of 65 in-depth interviews was based on the constant comparative method. We found that wide-ranging service changes designed to address the imperatives of the pandemic were highly consequential for people's candidacy. Macro-level changes, including increased emphasis on crisis and risk management and adapted risk assessment systems, produced effects that went far beyond restrictions in the availability of services: they profoundly re-structured service users' identification of their own candidacy, including perceptions of what counted as a problem worthy of attention and whether they as individuals needed, deserved, and were entitled to care. Services became less permeable, such that finding a point of entry to those services that remained open required more work of service users and carers. Healthcare professionals were routinely confronted by complex decisions and ethical dilemmas about provision of care, and their implicit judgements about access may have important implications for equity. Many of the challenges of access exposed by the pandemic related to pre-existing resource deficits and institutional weaknesses in care for people living with mental health difficulties. Overall, these findings affirm the value of the construct of candidacy for explaining access to mental healthcare, but also enable deepened understanding of the specific features of candidacy, offering enduring learning and implications for policy and practice., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Many people with psychosis experience difficulties in everyday social situations. Anxiety can make life challenging, leading to withdrawal. Cognitive therapy, using active in vivo learning, enables people to overcome fears. These treatments are not readily available to people with psychosis. Automated virtual reality (VR) therapy is a potential route to increase accessibility. The gameChange automated VR cognitive therapy is designed to help people overcome anxious avoidance and build confidence in everyday social situations. A virtual coach guides the person through the treatment. Understanding user experience is key to facilitating future implementation. Peer research methods, in which people with lived experience of the issues being studied are involved in collecting and analyzing data, may be useful in developing this understanding. This encourages researchers to draw on their lived experience to explore participant perspectives and co-create knowledge., Objective: The primary objective is to use a peer research approach to explore the participant experience of a novel automated VR therapy for anxious social avoidance. This includes understanding (1) the experience of anxious social avoidance in people with psychosis, (2) the experience of the gameChange automated VR cognitive therapy, and (3) any potential impact of the therapy in people's lives. This will inform future implementation strategies. The secondary objective is to explore how peer research can be used to co-create knowledge., Methods: Semistructured interviews will be conducted with approximately 25 people with psychosis participating in the gameChange trial (ISRCTN17308399). Participants will be recruited from the five trial centers based in National Health Service mental health trusts across England. Interviews will be conducted by two researchers. One is a peer researcher with similar lived experience to the trial participants. The other has lived experiences of mental health issues that do not directly overlap with those of the trial participants. Interview questions will focus on an individual's experience of anxious social avoidance, experiences of participating in the gameChange VR therapy, and any changes or impact following therapy. The interview schedule was developed in collaboration with the gameChange Lived Experience Advisory Panel (LEAP), comprising 10 project advisors with lived experience of psychosis. Interpretative phenomenological analysis and template analysis will be used to explore individual accounts. The LEAP will contribute to the analysis., Results: Data collection will be conducted from April to September 2021, and analysis will be conducted from June to October 2021. As of September 28, 2021, 20 participants had been interviewed, and coding is underway., Conclusions: The study, employing a peer research approach, may provide a unique insight into the experiences of anxious social avoidance in people with psychosis and its treatment using automated VR therapy. This will inform potential future implementation of VR automated therapies in mental health services., International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): DERR1-10.2196/31742., (©Jessica Bond, Dan Robotham, Alexandra Kenny, Vanessa Pinfold, Thomas Kabir, Humma Andleeb, Michael Larkin, Jennifer L Martin, Susan Brown, Aislinn D Bergin, Ariane Petit, Laina Rosebrock, Sinéad Lambe, Daniel Freeman, Felicity Waite. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (https://www.researchprotocols.org), 25.10.2021.)

Background: In the UK, acute mental healthcare is provided by in-patient wards and crisis resolution teams. Readmission to acute care following discharge is common. Acute day units (ADUs) are also provided in some areas., Aims: To assess predictors of readmission to acute mental healthcare following discharge in England, including availability of ADUs., Method: We enrolled a national cohort of adults discharged from acute mental healthcare in the English National Health Service (NHS) between 2013 and 2015, determined the risk of readmission to either in-patient or crisis teams, and used multivariable, multilevel logistic models to evaluate predictors of readmission., Results: Of a total of 231 998 eligible individuals discharged from acute mental healthcare, 49 547 (21.4%) were readmitted within 6 months, with a median time to readmission of 34 days (interquartile range 10-88 days). Most variation in readmission (98%) was attributable to individual patient-level rather than provider (trust)-level effects (2.0%). Risk of readmission was not associated with local availability of ADUs (adjusted odds ratio 0.96, 95% CI 0.80-1.15). Statistically significant elevated risks were identified for participants who were female, older, single, from Black or mixed ethnic groups, or from more deprived areas. Clinical predictors included shorter index admission, psychosis and being an in-patient at baseline., Conclusions: Relapse and readmission to acute mental healthcare are common following discharge and occur early. Readmission was not influenced significantly by trust-level variables including availability of ADUs. More support for relapse prevention and symptom management may be required following discharge from acute mental healthcare.

Background: The Covid-19 pandemic has imposed extraordinary strains on healthcare workers. But, in contrast with acute settings, relatively little attention has been given to those who work in mental health settings. We aimed to characterise the experiences of those working in English NHS secondary mental health services during the first wave of the pandemic., Methods: The design was a qualitative interview-based study. We conducted semi-structured, remote (telephone or online) interviews with 35 members of staff from NHS secondary (inpatient and community) mental health services in England. Analysis was based on the constant comparative method., Results: Participants reported wide-ranging changes in the organisation of secondary mental health care and the nature of work in response to the pandemic, including pausing of all services deemed to be "non-essential", deployment of staff across services to new and unfamiliar roles, and moves to remote working. The quality of participants' working life was impaired by increasing levels of daily challenge associated with trying to provide care in trying and constrained circumstances, the problems of forging new ways of working remotely, and constraints on ability to access informal support. Participants were confronted with difficult dilemmas relating to clinical decision-making, prioritisation of care, and compromises in ability to perform the therapeutic function of their roles. Other dilemmas centred on trying to balance the risks of controlling infection with the need for human contact. Many reported features of moral injury linked to their perceived failures in providing the quality or level of care that they felt service users needed. They sometimes sought to compensate for deficits in care through increased advocacy, taking on additional tasks, or making exceptions, but this led to further personal strain. Many experienced feelings of grief, helplessness, isolation, distress, and burnout. These problems were compounded by sometimes poor communication about service changes and by staff feeling that they could not take time off because of the potential impact on others. Some reported feeling poorly supported by organisations., Conclusions: Mental health workers faced multiple adversities during the pandemic that were highly consequential for their wellbeing. These findings can help in identifying targets for support.

Background: In the UK, around 5% of 11-16-year olds experience conduct problems of clinical importance. However, there are limited data on prevalence of conduct problems by ethnic group, and how putative social risk factors may explain any variations in prevalence. This study has two main aims: (1) to estimate the prevalence and nature of conduct problems overall, and by ethnic group and gender, among adolescents in diverse inner-city London schools; (2) to assess the extent to which putative risk factors - racial discrimination, socioeconomic status, parental control, and troublesome friends - explain any observed differences in prevalence of conduct problems between ethnic groups., Methods: This study uses baseline data from REACH, an accelerated cohort study of adolescent mental health in inner-city London. Self-report questionnaire data were collected on conduct problems and a range of distinct putative social risk factors (including racial discrimination, free school meals, troublesome friends, and parental care and control). A total of 4353 pupils, 51% girls, aged 11-14 participated. We estimated prevalence of conduct problems and used multilevel logistic regression to examine differences by ethnicity and gender and associations with putative risk factors., Results: Prevalence of conduct problems in inner-city schools was around three times higher than reported in national studies (i.e., 16% [95%CI: 15·2-17·5] vs. 5% [95%CI 4·6-5·9]). Compared with overall prevalence, conduct problems were lower among Indian/Pakistani/Bangladeshi (RR: 0.53 [95% CI:0.31-0.87]) and white British (RR: 0.65 [0.51-0.82]) groups, and higher among black Caribbean (RR: 1.39 [95%CI:1.19-1.62]) and mixed white and black (RR: 1.29 [95% CI: 1.02-1.60]) groups. Risk of conduct problems was higher among those who were exposed to racial discrimination compared with those who were not (RR: 1.95 [95% CI: 1.59-2.31])., Conclusions: Conduct problems are markedly more common in inner-city schools, and variations in the prevalence of conduct problems are, to some extent, rooted in modifiable social contexts and experiences, such as experiences of racial discrimination.

Objectives: To explore the experiences of service users, carers and staff seeking or providing secondary mental health services during the COVID-19 pandemic., Design: Qualitative interview study, codesigned with mental health service users and carers., Methods: We conducted semistructured, telephone or online interviews with a purposively constructed sample; a lived experience researcher conducted and analysed interviews with service users. Analysis was based on the constant comparison method., Setting: National Health Service (NHS) secondary mental health services in England between June and August 2020., Participants: Of 65 participants, 20 had either accessed or needed to access English secondary mental healthcare during the pandemic; 10 were carers of people with mental health difficulties; 35 were members of staff working in NHS secondary mental health services during the pandemic., Results: Experiences of remote care were mixed. Some service users valued the convenience of remote methods in the context of maintaining contact with familiar clinicians. Most participants commented that a lack of non-verbal cues and the loss of a therapeutic 'safe space' challenged therapeutic relationship building, assessments and identification of deteriorating mental well-being. Some carers felt excluded from remote meetings and concerned that assessments were incomplete without their input. Like service users, remote methods posed challenges for clinicians who reported uncertainty about technical options and a lack of training. All groups expressed concern about intersectionality exacerbating inequalities and the exclusion of some service user groups if alternatives to remote care are lost., Conclusions: Though remote mental healthcare is likely to become increasingly widespread in secondary mental health services, our findings highlight the continued importance of a tailored, personal approach to decision making in this area. Further research should focus on which types of consultations best suit face-to-face interaction, and for whom and why, and which can be provided remotely and by which medium., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: People with existing mental health conditions may be particularly vulnerable to the psychological effect of the COVID-19 pandemic. But their positive and negative appraisals, and coping behaviour could prevent or ameliorate future problems., Objective: To explore the emotional experiences, thought processes and coping behaviours of people with existing mental health problems and carers living through the pandemic., Methods: UK participants who identified as a mental health service user (N18), a carer (N5) or both (N8) participated in 30-minute semi-structured remote interviews (31 March 2020 to 9 April 2020). The interviews investigated the effects of social distancing and self-isolation on mental health and the ways in which people were coping. Data were analysed using a framework analysis. Three service user researchers charted data into a framework matrix (consisting of three broad categories: "emotional responses", "thoughts" and "behaviours") and then used an inductive process to capture other contextual themes., Results: Common emotional responses were fear, sadness and anger but despite negative emotions and uncertainty appraisals, participants described efforts to cope and maintain their mental wellbeing. This emphasised an increased reliance on technology, which enabled social contact and occupational or leisure activities. Participants also spoke about the importance of continued and adapted mental health service provision, and the advantages and disadvantages associated with changes in their living environment, life schedule and social interactions., Conclusion: This study builds on a growing number of qualitative accounts of how mental health service users and carers experienced and coped with extreme social distancing measures early in the COVID-19 pandemic. Rather than a state of helplessness this study contains a clear message of resourcefulness and resilience in the context of fear and uncertainty.

Background: For people in mental health crisis, acute day units (ADUs) provide daily structured sessions and peer support in non-residential settings, often as an addition or alternative to crisis resolution teams (CRTs). There is little recent evidence about outcomes for those using ADUs, particularly compared with those receiving CRT care alone., Aims: We aimed to investigate readmission rates, satisfaction and well-being outcomes for people using ADUs and CRTs., Method: We conducted a cohort study comparing readmission to acute mental healthcare during a 6-month period for ADU and CRT participants. Secondary outcomes included satisfaction (Client Satisfaction Questionnaire), well-being (Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale) and depression (Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale)., Results: We recruited 744 participants (ADU: n = 431, 58%; CRT: n = 312, 42%) across four National Health Service trusts/health regions. There was no statistically significant overall difference in readmissions: 21% of ADU participants and 23% of CRT participants were readmitted over 6 months (adjusted hazard ratio 0.78, 95% CI 0.54-1.14). However, readmission results varied substantially by setting. At follow-up, ADU participants had significantly higher Client Satisfaction Questionnaire scores (2.5, 95% CI 1.4-3.5, P < 0.001) and well-being scores (1.3, 95% CI 0.4-2.1, P = 0.004), and lower depression scores (-1.7, 95% CI -2.7 to -0.8, P < 0.001), than CRT participants., Conclusions: Patients who accessed ADUs demonstrated better outcomes for satisfaction, well-being and depression, and no significant differences in risk of readmission, compared with those who only used CRTs. Given the positive outcomes for patients, and the fact that ADUs are inconsistently provided in the National Health Service, their value and place in the acute care pathway needs further consideration and research.

Background: Acute Day Units (ADUs) provide intensive, non-residential, short-term treatment for adults in mental health crisis. They currently exist in approximately 30% of health localities in England, but there is little research into their functioning or effectiveness, and how this form of crisis care is experienced by service users. This qualitative study explores the views and experiences of stakeholders who use and work in ADUs., Methods: We conducted 36 semi-structured interviews with service users, staff and carers at four ADUs in England. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. Peer researchers collected data and contributed to analysis, and a Lived Experience Advisory Panel (LEAP) provided perspectives across the whole project., Results: Both service users and staff provided generally positive accounts of using or working in ADUs. Valued features were structured programmes that provide routine, meaningful group activities, and opportunities for peer contact and emotional, practical and peer support, within an environment that felt safe. Aspects of ADU care were often described as enabling personal and social connections that contribute to shifting from crisis to recovery. ADUs were compared favourably to other forms of home- and hospital-based acute care, particularly in providing more therapeutic input and social contact. Some service users and staff thought ADU lengths of stay should be extended slightly, and staff described some ADUs being under-utilised or poorly-understood by referrers in local acute care systems., Conclusions: Multi-site qualitative data suggests that ADUs provide a distinctive and valued contribution to acute care systems, and can avoid known problems associated with other forms of acute care, such as low user satisfaction, stressful ward environments, and little therapeutic input or positive peer contact. Findings suggest there may be grounds for recommending further development and more widespread implementation of ADUs to increase choice and effective support within local acute care systems.

Background: There is global interest in the reconfiguration of community mental health services, including primary care, to improve clinical and cost effectiveness., Aims: This study seeks to describe patterns of service use, continuity of care, health risks, physical healthcare monitoring and the balance between primary and secondary mental healthcare for people with severe mental illness in receipt of secondary mental healthcare in the UK., Method: We conducted an epidemiological medical records review in three UK sites. We identified 297 cases randomly selected from the three participating mental health services. Data were manually extracted from electronic patient medical records from both secondary and primary care, for a 2-year period (2012-2014). Continuous data were summarised by mean and s.d. or median and interquartile range (IQR). Categorical data were summarised as percentages., Results: The majority of care was from secondary care practitioners: of the 18 210 direct contacts recorded, 76% were from secondary care (median, 36.5; IQR, 14-68) and 24% were from primary care (median, 10; IQR, 5-20). There was evidence of poor longitudinal continuity: in primary care, 31% of people had poor longitudinal continuity (Modified Modified Continuity Index ≤0.5), and 43% had a single named care coordinator in secondary care services over the 2 years., Conclusions: The study indicates scope for improvement in supporting mental health service delivery in primary care. Greater knowledge of how care is organised presents an opportunity to ensure some rebalancing of the care that all people with severe mental illness receive, when they need it. A future publication will examine differences between the three sites that participated in this study.

Background: Recent estimates suggest around 14% of 11-16 years in England have a mental health problem. However, we know very little about the extent and nature of mental health problems among diverse groups in densely populated inner cities, where contexts and experiences may differ from the national average., Aims: To estimate the extent and nature of mental health problems in inner city London, overall and by social group, using data from our school-based accelerated cohort study of adolescent mental health, Resilience, Ethnicity and AdolesCent Mental Health., Methods: Self-report data on mental health (general mental health, depression, anxiety, self-harm) were analysed (n, 4353; 11-14 years, 85% minority ethnic groups). Mixed models were used to estimate weighted prevalences and adjusted risks of each type of problem, overall and by gender, cohort, ethnic group and free school meals (FSM) status., Results: The weighted prevalence of mental health problems was 18.6% (95% CI 16.4% to 20.8%). Each type of mental health problem was more common among girls compared with boys (adjusted risk ratios: mental health problems, 1.33, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.48; depression, 1.52, 1.30 to 1.73; anxiety, 2.09, 1.58 to 2.59, self-harm, 1.40, 1.06 to 1.75). Gender differences were more pronounced in older cohorts compared with the youngest. Mental health problems (1.28, 1.05 to 1.51) and self-harm (1.29, 1.02 to 1.56)-but not depression or anxiety-were more common among those receiving (vs not receiving) FSM. There were many similarities, with some variations, by ethnic group., Conclusions: Adolescent mental health problems and self-harm are common in inner city London. Gender differences in mental health problems may emerge during early adolescence., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Loneliness is associated with negative outcomes, including increased mortality and is common among people with mental health problems. This qualitative study, which was carried out as part of a feasibility trial, aimed to understand what enables and hinders people with severe depression and/or anxiety under the care of secondary mental health services in the United Kingdom to participate in the Community Navigator programme, and make progress with feelings of depression, anxiety and loneliness. The programme consisted of up to ten meetings with a Community Navigator and three optional group sessions., Methods: Semi-structured interviews were carried out with participants (n = 19) shortly after programme completion. A co-produced two-stage qualitative approach, involving narrative and reflexive thematic analysis, was undertaken by members of the study's working group, which included experts by experience, clinicians and researchers., Results: The narrative analysis showed that individuals have varied goals, hold mixed feelings about meeting other people and define progress differently. From the thematic analysis, six themes were identified that explained facilitators and challenges to participating in the programme: desire to connect with others; individual social confidence; finding something meaningful to do; the accessibility of resources locally; the timing of the programme; and the participant's relationship with the Community Navigator., Conclusions: We found that people with severe depression and/or anxiety supported by secondary mental health services may want to address feelings of loneliness but find it emotionally effortful to do so and a major personal challenge. This emotional effort, which manifests in individuals differently, can make it hard for participants to engage with a loneliness programme, though it was through facing personal challenges that a significant sense of achievement was felt. Factors at the individual, interpersonal and structural level, that enable or hinder an individual's participation should be identified early, so that people are able to make the best use out of the Community Navigator or other similar programmes.

Background: A core outcome set (COS) is a standardised collection of outcomes to be collected and reported in all trials within a research area. A COS can reduce reporting bias and facilitate evidence synthesis. This is currently unavailable for use in community-based bipolar trials. This research aimed to develop such a COS, with input from a full range of stakeholders., Methods: A co-production approach was used throughout. A longlist of outcomes was derived from focus groups with people with a bipolar diagnosis and carers, interviews with healthcare professionals and a rapid review of outcomes listed in bipolar trials on the Cochrane database. An expert panel with personal and/or professional experience of bipolar participated in a modified Delphi process and the COS was finalised at a consensus meeting., Results: Fifty participants rated the importance of each outcome. Sixty-six outcomes were included in Round 1 of the questionnaire; 13 outcomes were added by Round 1 participants and were rated in Round 2. Seventy-six percent of participants (n = 38) returned to Round 2 and 60 outcomes, including 4 outcomes added by participants in Round 1, received a rating of 7-9 by >70% and 1-3 by <25% of the sample. Fourteen participants finalised a COS containing 11 outcomes at the consensus meeting: personal recovery; connectedness; clinical recovery of bipolar symptoms; mental health and wellbeing; physical health; self-monitoring and management; medication effects; quality of life; service outcomes; experience of care; and use of coercion., Conclusions: This COS is recommended for use in community-based bipolar trials to ensure stakeholder-relevant outcomes, facilitate data synthesis, and transparent reporting. The COS includes guidance notes for each outcome to allow the identification of suitable measurement instruments. Further validation is recommended for use with a wide range of communities and to achieve standardised measurement., Competing Interests: The authors have read the journal’s policy and have the following competing interests: VP is the research director at McPin Foundation, a registered charity (1117336). She is a board member of the MRC developing mind programme, Rethink Mental Illness clinical advisory group, THIS Institute (Cambridge University) involvement and engagement panel. McPin receives funding from a variety of sources including NIHR / UKRI research grants, evaluation commissions from other charities and universities. MC receives funding from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, the NIHR Surgical Reconstruction and Microbiology Research Centre at the University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Health Data Research UK, Innovate UK (part of UK Research and Innovation), Macmillan Cancer Support, UCB Pharma and the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI). MC has received personal fees from Astellas, Daiichi Sankyo, Glaukos, Takeda, Merck, and Ferring outside the submitted work, and chairs the ISOQOL (International Society for Quality of Life Research) Best Practice for PROs in Trials Taskforce. TK is an employee of GlaxoSmithKline and completed work on this project while employed at Centre for Patient Reported Outcomes Research (CPROR), University of Birmingham (UoB). GT is currently funded by a Cancer Research UK Population Researcher Postdoctoral Fellowship award (reference: C56067/A21330). This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. There are no patents, products in development or marketed products associated with this research to declare.

Background: Public mental health (PMH) is a global challenge and a UK priority area for action. However, to progress, practitioners require a stronger evidence base regarding the effectiveness of approaches, particularly regarding promotion and prevention through community-centred interventions. In addition, policy-makers need to understand what is being delivered, particularly in areas of high need, to identify promising practices or gaps in PMH provision. Finally, and importantly, the public need better information regarding what approaches and services are available to them. We report a protocol designed to (1) identify the types of community-centred interventions used in purposively selected diverse geographical areas of England to improve PMH outcomes and (2) describe the type, target population, content and outcome measures of each intervention., Methods and Analysis: Five local authority areas of England were selected based on either high social deprivation or differing ethnic population statistics and geographical locations. Community-centred interventions in each area will be identified through: (1) desk-based data capture from standardised searches of publicly-available information (eg, policy, strategy and intervention advertising), (2) established professional networks and service contacts, (3) chain-referral sampling of individuals involved in local mental health promotion and prevention and (4) peer researchers, who will use their personal experience and local knowledge to help identify potentially relevant organisations. Data on the key features of the interventions will be extracted from individuals either by structured interviews or by electronic questionnaires with information regarding the intervention(s) of which they have knowledge. Initial data analysis will involve tabulating descriptive information and grouping interventions according to intervention type, target population, risk/protective factor and intended primary outcome. A descriptive comparison will be made between selected geographical areas., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval was obtained from Durham University's Department of Sport and Exercise Sciences Research Ethics Committee. We plan to disseminate our findings at relevant conferences, meetings and through peer-reviewed journals. We also plan to disseminate to the public and intervention providers through social media and/or newsletters., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Carers of people with psychosis are at a greater risk of physical and mental health problems compared to the general population. Yet, not all carers will experience a decline in health. This predicament has provided the rationale for research studies exploring what factors predict poor wellbeing in carers of people with psychosis. Our study builds on previous research by testing the predictive value of demographic variables on carer wellbeing within a single regression model., Methods: To achieve this aim, we conducted secondary analysis on two trial data sets that were merged and recoded for the purposes of this study., Results: Contrary to our hypotheses, only carer gender and age predicted carer wellbeing; with lower levels of carer wellbeing being associated with being female or younger (aged under 50). However, the final regression model explained only 11% of the total variance., Conclusions: Suggestions for future research are discussed in light of the limitations inherent in secondary analysis studies. Further research is needed where sample sizes are sufficient to explore the interactive and additive impact of other predictor variables.

Background: Loneliness is common among people with mental health problems and predicts poorer recovery from depression and anxiety. Needs for support with loneliness and social relationships are often under-addressed in mental health services. The Community Navigator programme was designed to reduce loneliness for adults (aged 18 and above) with complex depression or anxiety who were using secondary mental health services. Acceptability and feasibility of the programme and a trial evaluation were tested in a feasibility randomised controlled trial with qualitative evaluation., Methods: Forty participants with depression or anxiety using secondary mental health services were recruited from mental health services in two London sites and randomised to receive: the Community Navigator programme over six months in addition to routine care (n = 30); or routine care (n = 10). Measures of loneliness, depression, other clinical and social outcomes and service use were collected at baseline and six-months follow-up. Levels of engagement in the programme and rates of trial recruitment and retention were assessed. Programme delivery was assessed through session logs completed by Community Navigators. The acceptability of the programme was explored through qualitative interviews (n = 32) with intervention group participants, their family and friends, programme providers and other involved staff., Results: Forty participants were recruited in four months from 65 eligible potential participants asked. No one withdrew from the trial. Follow-up interviews were completed with 35 participants (88%). Process records indicated the programme was delivered as intended: there was a median of seven meetings with their Community Navigator (of a maximum ten) per treatment group participant. Qualitative interviews indicated good acceptability of the programme to stakeholders, and potential utility in reducing loneliness and depression and anxiety., Conclusions: A definitive, multi-site randomised controlled trial is recommended to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Community Navigator programme for people with complex anxiety and depression in secondary mental health services., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: Despite the potential of digital health interventions to improve the delivery of psychoeducation to people with mental health problems and their relatives, and substantial investment in their development, there is little evidence of successful implementation into clinical practice. We report the first implementation study of a digital health intervention: Relatives Education And Coping Toolkit (REACT), into routine mental healthcare. Our main aim was to identify critical factors affecting staff uptake and use of this online self-management tool for relatives of people with psychosis or bipolar., Methods: A mixed-methods, theory-driven (Normalisation Process Theory), iterative multiple case study approach using qualitative analysis of interviews with staff and quantitative reporting of uptake. Carer researchers were part of the research team., Results: In all, 281 staff and 159 relatives from Early Intervention teams across six catchment areas (cases) in England registered on REACT; 129 staff took part in qualitative interviews. Staff were positive about REACT helping services improve support and meet clinical targets. Implementation was hindered by: high staff caseloads and difficulties prioritising carers; perception of REACT implementation as research; technical difficulties using REACT; poor interoperability with trust computer systems and care pathways; lack of access to mobile technology and training; restricted forum populations; staff fears of risk, online trolling, and replacement by technology; and uncertainty around REACT's long-term availability., Conclusions: Digital health interventions, such as REACT, should be iteratively developed, evaluated, adapted and implemented, in partnership with the services they aim to support, and as part of a long term national strategy to co-develop integrated technology-enabled mental healthcare. Implementation strategies must instil a sense of ownership for staff and ensure they have adequate IT training, appropriate governance protocols for online working, and adequate mobile technologies. Wider contextual factors including adequate funding for mental health services and prioritisation of carer support, also need to be addressed for successful implementation of carer focussed digital interventions., Trial Registration: Study registration: ISCTRN 16267685.

Introduction: Antipsychotic 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 Analysis: This 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 Dissemination: Ethical 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 Number: ISRCTN90298520. EudraCT: 2016-000709-36. Pre-results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: TREB: In the last three years, TREB has been a member of scientific advisory boards for Otsuka/Lundbeck, Newron Pharmaceuticals and Gedeon Richter and received speaker fees from Janssen. GL has acted as an expert witness in cases concerning litigation about antidepressants., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Acute Day Units (ADUs) exist in some English NHS Trusts as an alternative to psychiatric inpatient admission. However, there is a lack of information about the number, configuration, and functioning of such units, and about the extent to which additional units might reduce admissions. This cross-sectional survey and cluster analysis of ADUs aimed to identify, categorise, and describe Acute Day Units (ADUs) in England., Methods: English NHS Mental Health Trusts with ADUs were identified in a mapping exercise, and a questionnaire was distributed to ADU managers. Cluster analysis was used to identify distinct models of service, and descriptive statistics are given to summarise the results of the survey questions., Results: Two types of service were identified by the cluster analysis: NHS (n = 27; and voluntary sector services (n = 18). Under a third of NHS Trusts have access to ADUs. NHS services typically have multi-disciplinary staff teams, operate during office hours, offer a range of interventions (medication, physical checks, psychological interventions, group sessions, peer support), and had a median treatment period of 30 days. Voluntary sector services had mostly non-clinically qualified staff, and typically offered supportive listening on a one-off, drop-in basis. Nearly all services aim to prevent or reduce inpatient admissions. Voluntary sector services had more involvement by service users and carers in management and running of the service than NHS services., Conclusions: The majority of NHS Trusts do not provide ADUs, despite their potential to reduce inpatient admissions. Further research of ADUs is required to establish their effectiveness and acceptability to service users, carers, and staff.

Objective: Mental health recovery narratives are often shared in peer support work and antistigma campaigns. Internet technology provides access to an almost unlimited number of narratives, and yet little is known about how they affect recipients. The aim of this study was to develop a conceptual framework characterizing the impact of recovery narratives on recipients., Method: A systematic review of evidence about the impact of mental health recovery narratives was conducted. Searches used electronic databases ( n = 9), reference tracking, hand-searching of selected journals ( n = 2), grey literature searching, and expert consultation ( n = 7). A conceptual framework was generated through a thematic analysis of included articles, augmented by consultation with a Lived Experience Advisory Panel., Results: In total, 8137 articles were screened. Five articles were included. Forms of impact were connectedness, understanding of recovery, reduction in stigma, validation of personal experience, affective responses, and behavioural responses. Impact was moderated by characteristics of the recipient, context, and narrative. Increases in eating disorder behaviours were identified as a harmful response specific to recipients with eating disorders., Conclusions: Mental health recovery narratives can promote recovery. Recovery narratives might be useful for clients with limited access to peers and in online interventions targeted at reducing social isolation in rural or remote locations, but support is needed for the processing of the strong emotions that can arise. Caution is needed for use with specific clinical populations. Protocol registration: Prospero-CRD42018090923.

Introduction: Adults with severe mental illness (SMI) have reduced life expectancy and many have comorbid physical health conditions. Primary care providers are experiencing increased demands for care for people with SMI. Barriers to accessing physical healthcare have been identified which negatively affect quality of care. We propose that peer support workers (PSWs) could deliver an intervention to service users to promote their physical health by drawing on existing social support. The aim of this research was to pilot a novel PSW-led intervention, including personal well-being network mapping, to improve access to primary care for physical health needs., Methods and Analysis: Twenty-four participants will be recruited from community-based mental health teams in two boroughs of London. Each participant will be offered a six-session intervention. Quantitative data will be collected before and after intervention (at 4-month follow-up). Qualitative interviews will be conducted with PSWs after completion of the intervention and with participants at a 4-month follow-up. Some intervention sessions will be observed by a member of the research team. This is a pilot study with a small sample aiming to assess acceptability and feasibility of an intervention. We aim to use the results to refine the existing theory of change and to optimise the intervention and its evaluation in a future randomised controlled trial. This study is strengthened by its potential clinical importance and origin in previous research where service users engaged with well-being network mapping., Ethics and Dissemination: This study has been approved by the London-Chelsea Regional Ethics Committee (ref: 17/LO/0585). The findings will be disseminated to participants, the National Health Service trusts that we recruited from, primary care mental health leads, commissioners and in peer-reviewed journals and academic conferences., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: There are significant challenges across the research pathway, including participant recruitment. This paper aims to explore the impact of clinician recruitment decision-making on sampling for a national mental health survey., Method: Clinical teams in 20 English mental healthcare provider organisations screened caseload lists, opting-out people whom, in their judgement, should not be approached to participate in a survey about stigma and discrimination. The reasons for each individual opted-out were requested. We assess these reasons against study recruitment criteria and investigated the impact of variations in opt-out rates on response rates and study findings., Results: Over 4 years (2009-2012), 37% (28,592 people) of the total eligible sampling frame were excluded. Exclusions comprised three categories: clinical teams did not screen their lists within recruitment period (12,392 people: 44%); protocol-specified exclusions (8364 people: 29%); clinician opt-outs queried by research team (other reasons were given) (7836, 28%). Response rates were influenced by decision-making variations., Conclusions: Large numbers of people were denied the opportunity to choose for themselves whether to participate or not in the Viewpoint Survey. The clinical research community, and their employing organisations, require support to better understand the value of research and best practice for research recruitment.

Background: Many people diagnosed with schizophrenia, bipolar or other psychoses in England receive the majority of their healthcare from primary care. Primary care practitioners may not be well equipped to meet their needs and there is often poor communication with secondary care. Collaborative care is a promising alternative model but has not been trialled specifically with this service user group in England. Collaborative care for other mental health conditions has not been widely implemented despite evidence of its effectiveness. We carried out a formative evaluation of the PARTNERS model of collaborative care, with the aim of establishing barriers and facilitators to delivery, identifying implementation support requirements and testing the initial programme theory., Methods: The PARTNERS intervention was delivered on a small scale in three sites. Qualitative data was collected from primary and secondary care practitioners, service users and family carers, using semi-structured interviews, session recordings and tape-assisted recall. Deductive and inductive thematic analysis was carried out; themes were compared to the programme theory and used to inform an implementation support strategy., Results: Key components of the intervention that were not consistently delivered as intended were: interaction with primary care teams, the use of coaching, and supervision. Barriers and facilitators identified were related to service commitment, care partner skills, supervisor understanding and service user motivation. An implementation support strategy was developed, with researcher facilitation of communication and supervision and additional training for practitioners. Some components of the intervention were not experienced as intended; this appeared to reflect difficulties with operationalising the intervention. Analysis of data relating to the intended outcomes of the intervention indicated that the mechanisms proposed in the programme theory had operated as expected., Conclusions: Additional implementation support is likely to be required for the PARTNERS model to be delivered; the effectiveness of such support may be affected by practitioner and service user readiness to change. There is also a need to test the programme theory more fully. These issues will be addressed in the process evaluation of our full trial., Trial Registration: ISRCTN95702682 , 26 October 2017.

Background: Mental health problems in children and young people are a vital public health issue. Only 25% of British school children with diagnosed mental health problems have specialist mental health services contact; front-line staff such as school nurses play a vital role in identifying and managing these problems, and accessing additional services for children, but there appears limited specific training and support for this aspect of their role., Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of a bespoke short training programme, which incorporated interactive and didactic teaching with printed and electronic resources. Hypothesized outcomes were improvements in school nurses' knowledge, attitudes, and recognition skills for depression., Design: A cluster-randomised controlled trial., Participants and Setting: 146 school nurses from 13 Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) in London were randomly allocated to receive the training programme., Methods: School nurses from 7 PCTs (n = 81) were randomly allocated to receive the training intervention and from 6 PCTs (n = 65) for waiting list control. Depression detection was measured by response to vignettes, attitudes measured with the Depression Attitude Questionnaire, and knowledge by the QUEST knowledge measure. These outcomes were measured at baseline and (following training) 3 months and nine months later, after which nurses in the control group received the training programme., Results: At 3 months, 115 nurses completed outcome measures. Training was associated with significant improvements in the specificity of depression judgements (52.0% for the intervention group and 47.2% for the control group, P = 0.039), and there was a non-significant increase in sensitivity (64.5% compared to 61.5% P = 0.25). Nurses' knowledge about depression improved (standardised mean difference = 0.97 [95% CI 0.58 to 1.35], P < 0.001); and confidence about their professional role in relation to depression increased. There was also a significant change in optimism about depression outcomes, but no change in tendency to defer depression management to specialists. At 9-month follow-up, improved specificity in depression identification and improved knowledge were maintained., Conclusions: This school nurse development programme, designed to convey best practice for the identification and care of depression, delivered significant improvements in some aspects of depression recognition and understanding, and was associated with increased confidence in working with young people experiencing mental health problems., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Connectedness is a central dimension of personal recovery from severe mental illness (SMI). Research reports that people with SMI have lower social capital and poorer-quality social networks compared to the general population.AimsTo identify personal well-being network (PWN) types and explore additional insights from mapping connections to places and activities alongside social ties., Method: We carried out 150 interviews with individuals with SMI and mapped social ties, places and activities and their impact on well-being. PWN types were developed using social network analysis and hierarchical k-means clustering of this data., Results: Three PWN types were identified: formal and sparse; family and stable; and diverse and active. Well-being and social capital varied within and among types. Place and activity data indicated important contextual differences within social connections that were not found by mapping social networks alone., Conclusions: Place locations and meaningful activities are important aspects of people's social worlds. Mapped alongside social networks, PWNs have important implications for person-centred recovery approaches through providing a broader understanding of individual's lives and resources.Declaration of interestNone.

Background: People with severe mental illnesses, including psychosis, have an increased risk of cardiovascular disease. We aimed to evaluate the effects of a primary care intervention on decreasing total cholesterol concentrations and cardiovascular disease risk in people with severe mental illnesses., Methods: We did this cluster randomised trial in general practices across England, with general practices as the cluster unit. We randomly assigned general practices (1:1) with 40 or more patients with severe mental illnesses using a computer-generated random sequence with a block size of four. Researchers were masked to allocation, but patients and general practice staff were not. We included participants aged 30-75 years with severe mental illnesses (schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, or psychosis), who had raised cholesterol concentrations (5·0 mmol/L) or a total:HDL cholesterol ratio of 4·0 mmol/L or more and one or more modifiable cardiovascular disease risk factors. Eligible participants were recruited within each practice before randomisation. The Primrose intervention consisted of appointments (≤12) with a trained primary care professional involving manualised interventions for cardiovascular disease prevention (ie, adhering to statins, improving diet or physical activity levels, reducing alcohol, or quitting smoking). Treatment as usual involved feedback of screening results only. The primary outcome was total cholesterol at 12 months and the primary economic analysis outcome was health-care costs. We used intention-to-treat analysis. The trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN13762819., Findings: Between Dec 10, 2013, and Sept 30, 2015, we recruited general practices and between May 9, 2014, and Feb 10, 2016, we recruited participants and randomly assigned 76 general practices with 327 participants to the Primrose intervention (n=38 with 155 patients) or treatment as usual (n=38 with 172 patients). Total cholesterol concentration data were available at 12 months for 137 (88%) participants in the Primrose intervention group and 152 (88%) participants in the treatment-as-usual group. The mean total cholesterol concentration did not differ at 12 months between the two groups (5·4 mmol/L [SD 1·1] for Primrose vs 5·5 mmol/L [1·1] for treatment as usual; mean difference estimate 0·03, 95% CI -0·22 to 0·29; p=0·788). This result was unchanged by pre-agreed supportive analyses. Mean cholesterol decreased over 12 months (-0·22 mmol/L [1·1] for Primrose vs -0·36 mmol/L [1·1] for treatment as usual). Total health-care costs (£1286 [SE 178] in the Primrose intervention group vs £2182 [328] in the treatment-as-usual group; mean difference -£895, 95% CI -1631 to -160; p=0·012) and psychiatric inpatient costs (£157 [135] vs £956 [313]; -£799, -1480 to -117; p=0·018) were lower in the Primrose intervention group than the treatment-as-usual group. Six serious adverse events of hospital admission and one death occurred in the Primrose group (n=7) and 23, including three deaths, occurred in the treatment-as-usual group (n=18)., Interpretation: Total cholesterol concentration at 12 months did not differ between the Primrose and treatment-as-usual groups, possibly because of the cluster design, good care in the treatment-as-usual group, short duration of the intervention, or suboptimal focus on statin prescribing. The association between the Primrose intervention and fewer psychiatric admissions, with potential cost-effectiveness, might be important., Funding: National Institute of Health Research Programme Grants for Applied Research., (Copyright © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Web-based interventions to support people to manage long-term health conditions are available and effective but rarely used in clinical services. The aim of this study is to identify critical factors impacting on the implementation of an online supported self-management intervention for relatives of people with recent onset psychosis or bipolar disorder into routine clinical care and to use this information to inform an implementation plan to facilitate widespread use and inform wider implementation of digital health interventions., Methods: A multiple case study design within six early intervention in psychosis (EIP) services in England, will be used to test and refine theory-driven hypotheses about factors impacting on implementation of the Relatives' Education And Coping Toolkit (REACT). Qualitative data including behavioural observation, document analysis, and in-depth interviews collected in the first two EIP services (wave 1) and analysed using framework analysis, combined with quantitative data describing levels of use by staff and relatives and impact on relatives' distress and wellbeing, will be used to identify factors impacting on implementation. Consultation via stakeholder workshops with staff and relatives and co-facilitated by relatives in the research team will inform development of an implementation plan to address these factors, which will be evaluated and refined in the four subsequent EIP services in waves 2 and 3. Transferability of the implementation plan to non-participating services will be explored., Discussion: Observation of implementation in a real world clinical setting, across carefully sampled services, in real time provides a unique opportunity to understand factors impacting on implementation likely to be generalizable to other web-based interventions, as well as informing further development of implementation theories. However, there are inherent challenges in investigating implementation without influencing the process under observation. We outline our strategies to ensure our design is transparent, flexible, and responsive to the timescales and activities happening within each service whilst also meeting the aims of the project., Trial Registration: ISCTRN 16267685 (09/03/2016).