Search

BackgroundMental ill-health is the leading cause of disability worldwide. Moreover, 75% of mental health conditions emerge between the ages of 12 and 25 years. Unfortunately, due to lack of resources and limited engagement with services, a majority of young people affected by mental ill-health do not access evidence-based support. To address this gap, our team has developed a multimodal, scalable digital mental health service (Enhanced Moderated Online Social Therapy [MOST+]) merging real-time, clinician-delivered web chat counseling; interactive user-directed online therapy; expert and peer moderation; and peer-to-peer social networking. ObjectiveThe primary aim of this study is to ascertain the feasibility, acceptability, and safety of MOST+. The secondary aims are to assess pre-post changes in clinical, psychosocial, and well-being outcomes and to explore the correlations between system use, perceived helpfulness, and secondary outcome variables. MethodsOverall, 157 young people seeking help from a national youth e-mental health service were recruited over 5 weeks. MOST+ was active for 9 weeks. All participants had access to interactive online therapy and integrated web chat counseling. Additional access to peer-to-peer social networking was granted to 73 participants (46.5%) for whom it was deemed safe. The intervention was evaluated via an uncontrolled single-group study. ResultsOverall, 93 participants completed the follow-up assessment. Most participants had moderate (52/157, 33%) to severe (96/157, 61%) mental health conditions. All a priori feasibility, acceptability, and safety criteria were met. Participants provided mean scores of ≥3.5 (out of 5) on ease of use (mean 3.7, SD 1.1), relevancy (mean 3.9, SD 1.0), helpfulness (mean 3.5, SD 0.9), and overall experience (mean 3.9, SD 0.8). Moreover, 98% (91/93) of participants reported a positive experience using MOST+, 82% (70/93) reported that using MOST+ helped them feel better, 86% (76/93) felt more socially connected using it, and 92% (86/93) said they would recommend it to others. No serious adverse events or inappropriate use were detected, and 97% (90/93) of participants reported feeling safe. There were statistically significant improvements in 8 of the 11 secondary outcomes assessed: psychological distress (d=−0.39; P

ImportanceClinical trials have not established the optimal type, sequence, and duration of interventions for people at ultrahigh risk of psychosis.ObjectiveTo determine the effectiveness of a sequential and adaptive intervention strategy for individuals at ultrahigh risk of psychosis.Design, setting, and participantsThe Staged Treatment in Early Psychosis (STEP) sequential multiple assignment randomized trial took place within the clinical program at Orygen, Melbourne, Australia. Individuals aged 12 to 25 years who were seeking treatment and met criteria for ultrahigh risk of psychosis according to the Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States were recruited between April 2016 and January 2019. Of 1343 individuals considered, 342 were recruited.InterventionsStep 1: 6 weeks of support and problem solving (SPS); step 2: 20 weeks of cognitive-behavioral case management (CBCM) vs SPS; and step 3: 26 weeks of CBCM with fluoxetine vs CBCM with placebo with an embedded fast-fail option of ω-3 fatty acids or low-dose antipsychotic medication. Individuals who did not remit progressed through these steps; those who remitted received SPS or monitoring for up to 12 months.Main outcomes and measuresGlobal Functioning: Social and Role scales (primary outcome), Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms, Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, quality of life, transition to psychosis, and remission and relapse rates.ResultsThe sample comprised 342 participants (198 female; mean [SD] age, 17.7 [3.1] years). Remission rates, reflecting sustained symptomatic and functional improvement, were 8.5%, 10.3%, and 11.4% at steps 1, 2, and 3, respectively. A total of 27.2% met remission criteria at any step. Relapse rates among those who remitted did not significantly differ between SPS and monitoring (step 1: 65.1% vs 58.3%; step 2: 37.7% vs 47.5%). There was no significant difference in functioning, symptoms, and transition rates between SPS and CBCM and between CBCM with fluoxetine and CBCM with placebo. Twelve-month transition rates to psychosis were 13.5% (entire sample), 3.3% (those who ever remitted), and 17.4% (those with no remission).Conclusions and relevanceIn this sequential multiple assignment randomized trial, transition rates to psychosis were moderate, and remission rates were lower than expected, partly reflecting the ambitious criteria set and challenges with real-world treatment fidelity and adherence. While all groups showed mild to moderate functional and symptomatic improvement, this was typically short of remission. While further adaptive trials that address these challenges are needed, findings confirm substantial and sustained morbidity and reveal relatively poor responsiveness to existing treatments.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02751632.

BackgroundMajor depression accounts for the greatest burden of all diseases globally. The peak onset of depression occurs between adolescence and young adulthood, and for many individuals, depression displays a relapse-remitting and increasingly severe course. Given this, the development of cost-effective, acceptable, and population-focused interventions for depression is critical. A number of online interventions (both prevention and acute phase) have been tested in young people with promising results. As these interventions differ in content, clinician input, and modality, it is important to identify key features (or unhelpful functions) associated with treatment outcomes. ObjectiveA systematic review of the research literature was undertaken. The review was designed to focus on two aspects of online intervention: (1) standard approaches evaluating online intervention content in randomized controlled designs (Section 1), and (2) second-generation online interventions and services using social networking (eg, social networking sites and online support groups) in any type of research design (Section 2). MethodsTwo specific literature searches were undertaken. There was no date range specified. The Section 1 search, which focused on randomized controlled trials, included only young people (12-25 years) and yielded 101 study abstracts, of which 15 met the review inclusion criteria. The Section 2 search, which included all study design types and was not restricted in terms of age, yielded 358 abstracts, of which 22 studies met the inclusion criteria. Information about the studies and their findings were extracted and tabulated for review. ResultsThe 15 studies identified in Section 1 described 10 trials testing eight different online interventions, all of which were based on a cognitive behavioral framework. All but one of the eight identified studies reported positive results; however, only five of the 15 studies used blinded interviewer administered outcomes with most trials using self-report data. Studies varied significantly in presentation of intervention content, treatment dose, and dropout. Only two studies included moderator or clinician input. Results for Section 2 were less consistent. None of the Section 2 studies reported controlled or randomized designs. With the exception of four studies, all included participants were younger than 25 years of age. Eight of the 16 social networking studies reported positive results for depression-related outcomes. The remaining studies were either mixed or negative. Findings for online support groups tended to be more positive; however, noteworthy risks were identified. ConclusionsOnline interventions with a broad cognitive behavioral focus appear to be promising in reducing depression symptomology in young people. Further research is required into the effectiveness of online interventions delivering cognitive behavioral subcomponents, such as problem-solving therapy. Evidence for the use of social networking is less compelling, although limited by a lack of well-designed studies and social networking interventions. A range of future social networking therapeutic opportunities are highlighted.

AimResearch has shown that preventative intervention in individuals at ultra-high risk of psychosis (UHR) improves symptomatic and functional outcomes. The staged treatment in early psychosis (STEP) trial aims to determine the most effective type, timing and sequence of interventions in the UHR population by sequentially studying the effectiveness of (1) support and problem solving, (2) cognitive-behavioural case management and (3) antidepressant medication with an embedded fast-fail option of (4) omega-3 fatty acids or low-dose antipsychotic medication. This paper presents the recruitment flow and baseline clinical characteristics of the sample.MethodsSTEP is a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial. We present the baseline demographics, clinical characteristics and acceptability and feasibility of this treatment approach as indicated by the flow of participants from first contact up until enrolment into the trial. Recruitment took place between April 2016 and January 2019.ResultsOf 1343, help-seeking young people who were considered for participation, 402 participants were not eligible and 599 declined/disengaged, resulting in a total of 342 participants enrolled in the study. The most common reason for exclusion was an active prescription of antidepressant medication. Eighty-five percent of the enrolled sample had a non-psychotic DSM-5 diagnosis and symptomatic/functional measures showed a moderate level of clinical severity and functional impairment.DiscussionThe present study demonstrates the acceptability and participant's general positive appraisal of sequential treatment. It also shows, in line with other trials in UHR individuals, a significant level of psychiatric morbidity and impairment, demonstrating the clear need for care in this group and that treatment is appropriate.

Aim: Lithium, even at low doses, appears to offer neuroprotection against a wide variety of insults. In this controlled pilot, we examined the safety (i.e., side‐effect profile) of lithium in a sample of young people identified at ultra‐high risk (UHR) for psychosis. The secondary aim was to explore whether lithium provided a signal of clinical efficacy in reducing transition to psychosis compared with treatment as usual (TAU). Methods: Young people attending the PACE clinic at Orygen, Melbourne, were prescribed a fixed dose (450 mg) of lithium (n = 25) or received TAU (n = 78). The primary outcome examined side‐effects, with transition to psychosis, functioning and measures of psychopathology assessed as secondary outcomes. Results: Participants in both groups were functionally compromised (lithium group GAF = 56.6; monitoring group GAF = 56.9). Side‐effect assessment indicated that lithium was well‐tolerated. 64% (n = 16) of participants in the lithium group were lithium‐adherent to week 12. Few cases transitioned to psychosis across the study period; lithium group 4% (n = 1); monitoring group 7.7% (n = 6). There was no difference in time to transition to psychosis between the groups. No group differences were observed in other functioning and symptom domains, although all outcomes improved over time. Conclusions: With a side‐effect profile either comparable to, or better than UHR antipsychotic trials, lithium might be explored for further research with UHR young people. A definitive larger trial is needed to determine the efficacy of lithium in this cohort. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AimPrevious research indicates that preventive intervention is likely to benefit patients "at risk" of psychosis, in terms of functional improvement, symptom reduction and delay or prevention of onset of threshold psychotic disorder. The primary aim of the current study is to test outcomes of ultra high risk (UHR) patients, primarily functional outcome, in response to a sequential intervention strategy consisting of support and problem solving (SPS), cognitive-behavioural case management and antidepressant medication. A secondary aim is to test biological and psychological variables that moderate and mediate response to this sequential treatment strategy.MethodsThis is a sequential multiple assignment randomised trial (SMART) consisting of three steps: Step 1: SPS (1.5 months); Step 2: SPS vs Cognitive Behavioural Case Management (4.5 months); Step 3: Cognitive Behavioural Case Management + Antidepressant Medication vs Cognitive Behavioural Case Management + Placebo (6 months). The intervention is of 12 months duration in total and participants will be followed up at 18 months and 24 months post baseline.ConclusionThis paper reports on the rationale and protocol of the Staged Treatment in Early Psychosis (STEP) study. With a large sample of 500 UHR participants this study will investigate the most effective type and sequence of treatments for improving functioning and reducing the risk of developing psychotic disorder in this clinical population.