Australian trial of behavioural activation for people with schizophrenia experiencing negative symptoms: a feasibility randomised controlled trial protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Negative symptoms are frequently experienced by people with schizophrenia. People with negative symptoms often have impaired social functioning and reduced quality of life. There is some evidence that cognitive-behavioural therapy results in a modest reduction in negative symptoms. Behavioural activation may be an effective alternative treatment for negative symptoms.The study aims to examine the feasibility and acceptability of implementing a behavioural activation trial delivered in three community mental health services in South Australia to support adult consumers experiencing negative symptoms of schizophrenia. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: This randomised controlled study will recruit a total of 60 consumers aged 18 years or above with mild-moderate negative symptoms of schizophrenia. The consumers will be randomly allocated to receive behavioural activation plus usual mental healthcare or usual mental healthcare alone. The intervention group will receive twelve 30 min sessions of behavioural activation, which will be delivered twice weekly over 6 weeks. In addition, we aim to recruit nine mental health workers from the three rural mental health services who will complete a 10-week online training programme in behavioural activation. Changes in negative symptoms of schizophrenia and depressive symptoms will be assessed at three time points: (a) at baseline, at 6 weeks and 3 month follow-ups. Changes in health-related quality of life (Short Form F36; secondary outcome) will be assessed at two time points: (a) at baseline and (b) immediately at postintervention after 6 weeks. At the end of the trial, interviews will be conducted with purposively selected mental health workers and consumers. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis will be used to assess feasibility and acceptability. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The findings from our feasibility study will inform the design of a fully powered randomised controlled trial to test the effectiveness of behavioural activation as a treatment for negative symptoms in schizophrenia. The study protocol was approved by the Central Adelaide Local Health Network Human Research Ethics Committee. The findings from this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed scientific journals and conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12623000348651p.

Development of family resource indicators for people with schizophrenic disorder in community by modified Delphi method in Beijing, China.

INTRODUCTION: Most people with schizophrenia in China are supported by their family members in community. The patient's family is confronted with severe care burden and pressure, which directly affects the caregiver's own health and social life, and indirectly affects the patient's rehabilitation. Adequate family resources can reduce the burden and pressure on families. But there is an absence of systematic family resource indicators for people with schizophrenic disorder in China. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to develop a set of family resource indicators for people with schizophrenic disorder in China. DESIGN: Preliminary family resource indicators were generated and refined by literature review and an expert consultation meeting. Two rounds of email-based Delphi survey were carried out to identify family resource indicators. SETTING: Two rounds of email-based Delphi survey were performed from July to September 2021 in Beijing, China. PARTICIPANTS: There were 15 mental health doctors from community health service centres and four psychiatrists from tertiary hospitals, and two primary care researchers from universities in the first and second rounds Delphi survey. RESULTS: All the 21 experts participated in both rounds of Delphi survey. A total of 46 indicators achieved consensus for inclusion in the final set of indicators after two rounds of Delphi survey. The final set of indicators was grouped into 10 domains: financial support (three indicators), psychological and spiritual support (eight indicators), medical treatment (three indicators), information and education (three indicators), structural support (two indicators), external family resources included social resources (five indicators), cultural resources (two indicators), economic resources (seven indicators), environmental resources (four indicators) and medical resources (nine indicators). CONCLUSIONS: A set of 46 family resource indicators for people with schizophrenic disorder in community was identified by an iterative Delphi process in Beijing, China. However, the indicators still need to be validated by testing in further studies.

Collaborative care approaches for people with severe mental illness.

BACKGROUND: Collaborative care for severe mental illness (SMI) is a community-based intervention that promotes interdisciplinary working across primary and secondary care. Collaborative care interventions aim to improve the physical and/or mental health care of individuals with SMI. This is an update of a 2013 Cochrane review, based on new searches of the literature, which includes an additional seven studies. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of collaborative care approaches in comparison with standard care (or other non-collaborative care interventions) for people with diagnoses of SMI who are living in the community. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Study-Based Register of Trials (10 February 2021). We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders (CCMD) controlled trials register (all available years to 6 June 2016). Subsequent searches on Ovid MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO together with the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (with an overlap) were run on 17 December 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) where interventions described as 'collaborative care' were compared with 'standard care' for adults (18+ years) living in the community with a diagnosis of SMI. SMI was defined as schizophrenia, other types of schizophrenia-like psychosis or bipolar affective disorder. The primary outcomes of interest were: quality of life, mental state and psychiatric admissions at 12 months follow-up. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Pairs of authors independently extracted data. We assessed the quality and certainty of the evidence using RoB 2 (for the primary outcomes) and GRADE. We compared treatment effects between collaborative care and standard care. We divided outcomes into short-term (up to six months), medium-term (seven to 12 months) and long-term (over 12 months). For dichotomous data we calculated the risk ratio (RR) and for continuous data we calculated the standardised mean difference (SMD), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used random-effects meta-analyses due to substantial levels of heterogeneity across trials. We created a summary of findings table using GRADEpro. MAIN RESULTS: Eight RCTs (1165 participants) are included in this review. Two met the criteria for type A collaborative care (intervention comprised of the four core components). The remaining six met the criteria for type B (described as collaborative care by the trialists, but not comprised of the four core components). The composition and purpose of the interventions varied across studies. For most outcomes there was low- or very low-certainty evidence. We found three studies that assessed the quality of life of participants at 12 months. Quality of life was measured using the SF-12 and the WHOQOL-BREF and the mean endpoint mental health component scores were reported at 12 months. Very low-certainty evidence did not show a difference in quality of life (mental health domain) between collaborative care and standard care in the medium term (at 12 months) (SMD 0.03, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.32; 3 RCTs, 227 participants). Very low-certainty evidence did not show a difference in quality of life (physical health domain) between collaborative care and standard care in the medium term (at 12 months) (SMD 0.08, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.33; 3 RCTs, 237 participants). Furthermore, in the medium term (at 12 months) low-certainty evidence did not show a difference between collaborative care and standard care in mental state (binary) (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.28; 1 RCT, 253 participants) or in the risk of being admitted to a psychiatric hospital at 12 months (RR 5.15, 95% CI 0.67 to 39.57; 1 RCT, 253 participants). One study indicated an improvement in disability (proxy for social functioning) at 12 months in the collaborative care arm compared to usual care (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.95; 1 RCT, 253 participants); we deemed this low-certainty evidence. Personal recovery and satisfaction/experience of care outcomes were not reported in any of the included studies. The data from one study indicated that the collaborative care treatment was more expensive than standard care (mean difference (MD) international dollars (Int$) 493.00, 95% CI 345.41 to 640.59) in the short term. Another study found the collaborative care intervention to be slightly less expensive at three years. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review does not provide evidence to indicate that collaborative care is more effective than standard care in the medium term (at 12 months) in relation to our primary outcomes (quality of life, mental state and psychiatric admissions). The evidence would be improved by better reporting, higher-quality RCTs and the assessment of underlying mechanisms of collaborative care. We advise caution in utilising the information in this review to assess the effectiveness of collaborative care.

Digital Mental Health for Schizophrenia and Other Severe Mental Illnesses: An International Consensus on Current Challenges and Potential Solutions.

BACKGROUND: Digital approaches may be helpful in augmenting care to address unmet mental health needs, particularly for schizophrenia and severe mental illness (SMI). OBJECTIVE: An international multidisciplinary group was convened to reach a consensus on the challenges and potential solutions regarding collecting data, delivering treatment, and the ethical challenges in digital mental health approaches for schizophrenia and SMI. METHODS: The consensus development panel method was used, with an in-person meeting of 2 groups: the expert group and the panel. Membership was multidisciplinary including those with lived experience, with equal participation at all stages and coproduction of the consensus outputs and summary. Relevant literature was shared in advance of the meeting, and a systematic search of the recent literature on digital mental health interventions for schizophrenia and psychosis was completed to ensure that the panel was informed before the meeting with the expert group. RESULTS: Four broad areas of challenge and proposed solutions were identified: (1) user involvement for real coproduction; (2) new approaches to methodology in digital mental health, including agreed standards, data sharing, measuring harms, prevention strategies, and mechanistic research; (3) regulation and funding issues; and (4) implementation in real-world settings (including multidisciplinary collaboration, training, augmenting existing service provision, and social and population-focused approaches). Examples are provided with more detail on human-centered research design, lived experience perspectives, and biomedical ethics in digital mental health approaches for SMI. CONCLUSIONS: The group agreed by consensus on a number of recommendations: (1) a new and improved approach to digital mental health research (with agreed reporting standards, data sharing, and shared protocols), (2) equal emphasis on social and population research as well as biological and psychological approaches, (3) meaningful collaborations across varied disciplines that have previously not worked closely together, (4) increased focus on the business model and product with planning and new funding structures across the whole development pathway, (5) increased focus and reporting on ethical issues and potential harms, and (6) organizational changes to allow for true communication and coproduction with those with lived experience of SMI. This study approach, combining an international expert meeting with patient and public involvement and engagement throughout the process, consensus methodology, discussion, and publication, is a helpful way to identify directions for future research and clinical implementation in rapidly evolving areas and can be combined with measurements of real-world clinical impact over time. Similar initiatives will be helpful in other areas of digital mental health and similarly fast-evolving fields to focus research and organizational change and effect improved real-world clinical implementation.

Risk assessment for aggressive behaviour in schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Aggressive or violent behaviour is often associated with people with schizophrenia in common perceptions of the disease. Risk assessment methods have been used to identify and evaluate the behaviour of those individuals who are at the greatest risk of perpetrating aggression or violence or characterise the likelihood to commit acts. Although many different interventions have been developed to decrease aggressive or violent incidences in inpatient care, staff working in inpatient settings seek easy-to-use methods to decrease patient aggressive events. However, many of these are time-consuming, and they require intensive training for staff and patient monitoring. It has also been recognised in clinical practice that if staff monitor patients' behaviour in a structured manner, the monitoring itself may result in a reduction of aggressive/violent behaviour and incidents in psychiatric settings. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of structured aggression or violence risk assessment methods for people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like illnesses. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials, which is based on CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, ISRCTN registry, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP, on 10 February 2021. We also inspected references of all identified studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing structured risk assessment methods added to standard professional care with standard professional care for the evaluation of aggressive or violent behaviour among people with schizophrenia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently inspected citations, selected studies, extracted data, and appraised study quality. For binary outcomes, we calculated a standard estimation of the risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI). For continuous outcomes, we calculated the mean difference (MD) and its 95% CI. We assessed risk of bias in the included studies and created a summary of findings table using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included four studies in the review. The total number of participants was not identifiable, as some studies provided number of participants included, and some only patient days. The studies compared a package of structured assessment methods with a control group that included routine nursing care and drug therapy or unstructured psychiatric observations/treatment based on clinical judgement. In two studies, information about treatment in control care was not available. One study reported results for our primary outcome, clinically important change in aggressive/violent behaviour, measured by the rate of severe aggression events. There was likely a positive effect favouring structured risk assessment over standard professional care (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.85; 1 RCT; 1852 participants; corrected for cluster design: RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.93; moderate-certainty evidence). One trial reported data for the use of coercive measures (seclusion room). Compared to standard professional care, structured risk assessment may have little or no effect on use of seclusion room as days (corrected for cluster design: RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.27 to 3.07; N = 20; low-certainty evidence) or use of seclusion room as secluded participants (RR 1.83, 95% CI 0.39 to 8.7; 1 RCT; N = 20; low-certainty evidence). However, seclusion room may be used less frequently in the standard professional care group compared to the structured risk assessment group (incidence) (corrected for cluster design: RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.49 to 5.47; 1 RCT; N = 20; substantial heterogeneity, Chi2 = 0.0; df = 0.0; P = 0.0; I2 = 100%; low-certainty evidence). There was no evidence of a clear effect on adverse events of escape (RR 0.2, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.11; 1 RCT; n = 200; very low-certainty evidence); fall down (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.15; 1 RCT; n = 200; very low-certainty evidence); or choking (RR 0.2, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.11; 1 RCT; n = 200; very low-certainty evidence) when comparing structured risk assessment to standard professional care. There were no useable data for patient-related outcomes such as global state, acceptance of treatment, satisfaction with treatment, quality of life, service use, or costs. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on the available evidence, it is not possible to conclude that structured aggression or violence risk assessment methods are effective for people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like illnesses. Future work should combine the use of interventions and structured risk assessment methods to prevent aggressive incidents in psychiatric inpatient settings.

Shanghai Community-Based Schizophrenia Cohort (SCS): a protocol for establishing a longitudinal cohort and research database of patients with schizophrenia receiving community-based mental health treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Drivers for remission, relapse and violence-related behaviour among patients with schizophrenia are the most complicated issue. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study aims to recruit a longitudinal cohort of patients with schizophrenia. Two suburban districts and two urban districts were randomly selected according to health service facilities, population, geographical region and socioeconomic status. Individuals (>18 years old) who received a diagnosis of schizophrenia following the International Classification of Diseases (10th edition) criteria within the past 3 years will be invited as participants. Assessments will be carried out in local community health centres. Data will be used to (1) establish a community-based schizophrenia cohort and biobank, (2) prospectively determine the course of multidimensional functional outcomes of patients with schizophrenia who are receiving community-based mental health treatment, and (3) map the trajectories of patients with schizophrenia and prospectively determine the course of multidimensional outcomes based on the differential impact of potentially modifiable moderators. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been reviewed and approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of Shanghai Mental Health Center (2021-67). Results of the study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals. If effective, related educational materials will be released to the public.

Therapeutic potential of gamma entrainment using sensory stimulation for cognitive symptoms associated with schizophrenia.

Schizophrenia is a complex neuropsychiatric disorder with significant morbidity. Treatment options that address the spectrum of symptoms are limited, highlighting the need for innovative therapeutic approaches. Gamma Entrainment Using Sensory Stimulation (GENUS) is an emerging treatment for neuropsychiatric disorders that uses sensory stimulation to entrain impaired oscillatory network activity and restore brain function. Aberrant oscillatory activity often underlies the symptoms experienced by patients with schizophrenia. We propose that GENUS has therapeutic potential for schizophrenia. This paper reviews the current status of schizophrenia treatment and explores the use of sensory stimulation as an adjunctive treatment, specifically through gamma entrainment. Impaired gamma frequency entrainment is observed in patients, particularly in response to auditory and visual stimuli. Thus, sensory stimulation, such as music listening, may have therapeutic potential for individuals with schizophrenia. GENUS holds novel therapeutic potential to improve the lives of individuals with schizophrenia, but further research is required to determine the efficacy of GENUS, optimize its delivery and therapeutic window, and develop strategies for its implementation in specific patient populations.

Association of somatic comorbidity and treatment adherence in patients with psychotic disorder.

BACKGROUND: Increased risk for somatic comorbidity in individuals with schizophrenia has been well established. In addition, psychiatric patients with somatic illnesses are more likely to have more psychiatric readmissions. Increased burden of treatment related to chronic somatic comorbidities may be associated with lower adherence to psychiatric medication. METHODS: Cross-sectional study of 275 patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorder. A general practitioner performed a complete physical health checkup for all participants, including a complete medical examination and laboratory tests. Patients' adherence, attitudes, insight, and side-effects were evaluated using the Attitudes toward Neuroleptic Treatment Scale. Overall symptomatology was measured using the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale. Regression analysis was used to investigate interactions and associations among health beliefs, disease burden, and treatment adherence. Separate regression models were utilized to account for the complexity of health behavior and treatment adherence pathways. RESULTS: Patients' somatic comorbidity and health behavior were not associated with adherence or attitudes toward antipsychotic treatment. High dose of antipsychotics and obesity were related to the need for medical interventions, while a healthy diet reduced the risk. Higher BPRS score and older age were associated with having somatic symptoms. Somatic comorbidities had no negative effects on treatment adherence or attitudes. CONCLUSION: This study focuses on exploring possible associations between health beliefs and treatment adherence pathways in patients with psychotic disorders. Contrary to our hypotheses, we found no evidence to support our health belief and diseases burden models and their associations.

COVID-19 pandemic and emergency department visits for psychosis: Visit volume, restraint use, medication use, psychiatric hospitalization, and length of stay.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with a schizophrenia spectrum disorder were at heightened risk for interruptions in psychiatric care during the coronavirus-19 (COVID 19) pandemic. There is limited work exploring the pandemic's impact on emergency department (ED) visit volume, use of restraint and parenteral medications, inpatient psychiatric (IP) hospitalization, and ED length of stay (LOS) among this population. METHODS: We retrospectively examined 2134 ED visits with a billing code for psychosis between March 1, 2019-February 28, 2021. We used Poisson regression analysis to compare ED visit volume between the pandemic and pre-pandemic periods. Restraint use, parenteral antipsychotic or benzodiazepine use, IP hospitalization, and ED LOS were compared between the two periods using chi-square tests and independent samples t-tests. RESULTS: Overall volume of psychosis-related ED visits during the pandemic did not differ significantly from the prior year. Rates of restraint use (16.2 % vs 11.6 %, p < .01), parenteral antipsychotic (22.6 % vs 14.9, p < .001), and parenteral benzodiazepine (22.3 % vs 16.3 %, p < .001) use were significantly higher during the pandemic. Fewer patients had an IP hospital disposition during the pandemic than the year prior (57.8 % vs. 61.9 %, p < .05). ED LOS was longer during the pandemic compared to pre-pandemic (28.37 h vs 20.26 h, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Although the volume of psychosis-related ED visits remained constant, restraint and parenteral medication use rates were significantly higher during the pandemic. ED LOS increased but fewer ED visits resulted in IP hospitalization. These findings underscore the importance of planning for increased acuity of psychosis ED presentations during public health emergencies.

Blended care in psychosis - A systematic review.

Blended-care, a psychosocial intervention combining traditional, face-to-face therapy with digital mental health tools, has shown potential for improving therapeutic processes, fostering patient engagement, and augmenting clinical outcomes. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the development and effectiveness of blended-care interventions tailored for adults diagnosed with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders or other conditions with psychotic features. Our search strategy spanned three electronic databases (PsycINFO, Web of Science, and PubMed) in accordance with the reporting guidelines outlined by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. We identified 11 papers, each examining the use of one of eight distinct blended-care interventions. Significantly, the majority of these papers (10/11, 91 %) examined these interventions exclusively within controlled research environments, demonstrating both acceptability and favourable impacts on symptomatology and recovery (e.g., 0.22 ≤ Cohen's ds ≤ 1.00). Only one intervention was examined in research settings and real-world conditions, and the shift resulted in low real-world uptake (e.g., only 50 % of practitioners were able to engage at least one of their clients with the intervention) and an inability to reproduce positive changes in clinical outcomes. Additional research is needed to determine the viability of successfully developing and implementing blended-care interventions for psychosis in real-world conditions. An exploration of the developmental processes that could facilitate the transition from research settings to routine clinical practice is vital.

Transient Fever Response After ECT in a Patient with Catatonic Schizophrenia: A Case Report. / Katatonik Sizofreni Hastasinda EKT Sonrasi Ortaya Çikan Geçici Ates Yaniti: Olgu Sunumu.

Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is an effective and safe treatment method for many psychiatric disorders. In general medical practice, ECT may cause side effects as most other treatment methods do. Headache, myalgia, nausea, vomiting, confusion, anterograde amnesia are common side effects of electroconvulsive therapy. Fever; in addition to general medical conditions such as infection, malignancy, connective tissue diseases, drug treatments, malignant hyperthermia, convulsions, it can also occur due to conditions such as neuroleptic malignant syndrome (NMS), serotonin syndrome, catatonia, malignant catatonia, which are frequently encountered in psychiatry clinics. In the literature, transient fever response due to electroconvulsive therapy application have been described, albeit rarely. Although there are many proposed mechanisms for the emergence of a fever response, regardless of its cause, it is still not understood why some fever responses occur. In this article, we present the differential diagnosis of the fever response, possible causes, and the mechanisms that may reveal the secondary fever response to electroconvulsive therapy in a case with a diagnosis of catatonic schizophrenia, who developed a fever response during electroconvulsive therapy sessions and no fever response was observed at times other than electroconvulsive therapy sessions. In this case, postictal benign fever response associated with electroconvulsive therapy was considered after excluding other medical conditions that may cause a fever response after electroconvulsive therapy. Keywords: ECT, Fever, Catatonia, NMS.

Multimodal workflows optimally predict response to repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in patients with schizophrenia: a multisite machine learning analysis.

The response variability to repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) challenges the effective use of this treatment option in patients with schizophrenia. This variability may be deciphered by leveraging predictive information in structural MRI, clinical, sociodemographic, and genetic data using artificial intelligence. We developed and cross-validated rTMS response prediction models in patients with schizophrenia drawn from the multisite RESIS trial. The models incorporated pre-treatment sMRI, clinical, sociodemographic, and polygenic risk score (PRS) data. Patients were randomly assigned to receive active (N = 45) or sham (N = 47) rTMS treatment. The prediction target was individual response, defined as ≥20% reduction in pre-treatment negative symptom sum scores of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale. Our multimodal sequential prediction workflow achieved a balanced accuracy (BAC) of 94% (non-responders: 92%, responders: 95%) in the active-treated group and 50% in the sham-treated group. The clinical, clinical + PRS, and sMRI-based classifiers yielded BACs of 65%, 76%, and 80%, respectively. Apparent sadness, inability to feel, educational attainment PRS, and unemployment were most predictive of non-response in the clinical + PRS model, while grey matter density reductions in the default mode, limbic networks, and the cerebellum were most predictive in the sMRI model. Our sequential modelling approach provided superior predictive performance while minimising the diagnostic burden in the clinical setting. Predictive patterns suggest that rTMS responders may have higher levels of brain grey matter in the default mode and salience networks which increases their likelihood of profiting from plasticity-inducing brain stimulation methods, such as rTMS. The future clinical implementation of our models requires findings to be replicated at the international scale using stratified clinical trial designs.

Is it more effective for anhedonia and avolition? A systematic review and meta-analysis of non-invasive brain stimulation interventions for negative symptoms in schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques are a promising tool for treating the negative symptoms of schizophrenia. Growing evidence suggests that different dimensions of negative symptoms have partly distinct underlying pathophysiological mechanisms. Previous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown inconsistent impacts of NIBS across dimensions. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effects of NIBS on general negative symptoms, and on specific domains, including blunted affect, alogia, asociality, anhedonia, and avolition. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, PsycINFO, OpenGrey, and Clinicaltrials.gov from the first date available to October, 2023. RESULTS: Among 1049 studies, we identified eight high-quality RCTs. NIBS significantly affects general negative symptoms (SMD = -0.54, 95% CI [-0.88, -0.21]) and all five domains (SMD = -0.32 to -0.63). Among dimensions, better effects have been shown for improvement of avolition (SMD = -0.47, 95% CI [-0.81, -0.13]) and anhedonia (SMD = -0.63, 95% CI [-0.98, -0.28]). Subgroup analyses of studies that applied once daily stimulation or >10 sessions showed significantly reduced negative symptom severity. CONCLUSION: NIBS exerts distinct effects across multiple dimensions of negative symptom, with treatment effects related to stimulation frequency and total sessions. These results need to be confirmed in dedicated studies.

Navigated and individual α-peak-frequency-guided transcranial magnetic stimulation in male patients with treatment-refractory schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Previous electroencephalography (EEG) studies have indicated altered brain oscillatory α-band activity in schizophrenia, and treatment with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) using individualized α-frequency has shown therapeutic effects. Magnetic resonance imaging-based neuronavigation methods allow stimulation of a specific cortical region and improve targeting of rTMS; therefore, we sought to study the efficacy of navigated, individual α-peak-frequency-guided rTMS (αTMS) on treatment-refractory schizophrenia. METHODS: We recruited medication-refractory male patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder in this doubleblind, sham-controlled study. We randomized patients to a 3-week course of either active αTMS or sham stimulation applied to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). We assessed participants with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and the Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI) at baseline and after treatment. We conducted a follow-up assessment with the PANSS 3 months after intervention. RESULTS: We included 44 patients. After treatment, we observed a significantly higher PANSS total score (p = 0.029), PANSS general psychopathology score (p = 0.027) and PANSS 5-factor model cognitive-disorganized factor score (p = 0.011) in the αTMS group than the sham group. In addition, the CGI-Improvement score was significantly higher among those who received αTMS compared with sham stimulation (p = 0.048). LIMITATIONS: The limited number of study participants included only male patients. Depression was not formally evaluated. CONCLUSION: Navigated αTMS to the left DLPFC reduced total, general psychopathological, and cognitive-disorganized symptoms of schizophrenia. These results provide evidence for the therapeutic efficacy of individual α-peak-frequency-guided rTMS in treatment-refractory schizophrenia. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01941251; ClinicalTrials.gov.

Combining neuroimaging and brain stimulation to test alternative causal pathways for nicotine addiction in schizophrenia.

The smoking rate is high in patients with schizophrenia. Brain stimulation targeting conventional brain circuits associated with nicotine addiction has also yielded mixed results. We aimed to identify alternative circuitries associated with nicotine addiction in both the general population and schizophrenia, and then test whether modulation of such circuitries may alter nicotine addiction behaviors in schizophrenia. In Study I of 40 schizophrenia smokers and 51 non-psychiatric smokers, cross-sectional neuroimaging analysis identified resting state functional connectivity (rsFC) between the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (dmPFC) and multiple extended amygdala regions to be most robustly associated with nicotine addiction severity in healthy controls and schizophrenia patients (p = 0.006 to 0.07). In Study II with another 30 patient smokers, a proof-of-concept, patient- and rater-blind, randomized, sham-controlled rTMS design was used to test whether targeting the newly identified dmPFC location may causally enhance the rsFC and reduce nicotine addiction in schizophrenia. Although significant interactions were not observed, exploratory analyses showed that this dmPFC-extended amygdala rsFC was enhanced by 4-week active 10Hz rTMS (p = 0.05) compared to baseline; the severity of nicotine addiction showed trends of reduction after 3 and 4 weeks (p ≤ 0.05) of active rTMS compared to sham; Increased rsFC by active rTMS predicted reduction of cigarettes/day (R = -0.56, p = 0.025 uncorrected) and morning smoking severity (R = -0.59, p = 0.016 uncorrected). These results suggest that the dmPFC-extended amygdala circuit may be linked to nicotine addiction in schizophrenia and healthy individuals, and future efforts targeting its underlying pathophysiological mechanisms may yield more effective treatment for nicotine addiction.

Lower odds of successful community discharge after medical hospitalization for Veterans with schizophrenia: A retrospective cohort study of national data.

Medical comorbidity, particularly cardiovascular diseases, contributes to high rates of hospital admission and early mortality in people with schizophrenia. The 30 days following hospital discharge represents a critical period for mitigating adverse outcomes. This study examined the odds of successful community discharge among Veterans with schizophrenia compared to those with major affective disorders and those without serious mental illness (SMI) after a heart failure hospital admission. Data for Veterans hospitalized for heart failure were obtained from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services between 2011 and 2019. Psychiatric diagnoses and medical comorbidities were assessed in the year prior to hospitalization. Successful community discharge was defined as remaining in the community without hospital readmission, death, or hospice for 30 days after hospital discharge. Logistic regression analyses adjusting for relevant factors were used to examine whether individuals with a schizophrenia diagnosis showed lower odds of successful community discharge versus both comparison groups. Out of 309,750 total Veterans in the sample, 7377 (2.4%) had schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder and 32,472 (10.5%) had major affective disorders (bipolar disorder or recurrent major depressive disorder). Results from adjusted logistic regression analyses demonstrated significantly lower odds of successful community discharge for Veterans with schizophrenia compared to the non-SMI (Odds Ratio [OR]: 0.63; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 0.60, 0.66) and major affective disorders (OR: 0.65, 95%; CI: 0.62, 0.69) groups. Intervention efforts should target the transition from hospital to home in the subgroup of Veterans with schizophrenia.

Identification and treatment of individuals with childhood-onset and early-onset schizophrenia.

Approximately 8 % of patients with schizophrenia are diagnosed before age 18, and 18 % experience their first symptoms before age 18. This narrative review explores the management of patients with early-onset schizophrenia (EOS) and childhood-onset schizophrenia (COS) from diagnosis to their transition to adult care settings. Early diagnosis of schizophrenia in children and adolescents is essential for improving outcomes, but delays are common due to overlapping of symptoms with developmental phenomena and other psychiatric conditions, including substance use, and lack of clinicians' awareness. Once diagnosed, antipsychotic treatment is key, with specific second-generation agents generally being preferred due to better tolerability and their broader efficacy evidence-base in youth. Dosing should be carefully individualized, considering age-related differences in drug metabolism and side effect liability. Clinicians must be vigilant in detecting early non-response and consider switching or dose escalation when appropriate. Since early age of illness onset is a consistent risk factor for treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS), clinicians need to be competent in diagnosing TRS and using clozapine. Since COS and EOS are associated with cognitive deficits and impaired functioning, psychosocial interventions should be considered to improve overall functioning and quality of life. Good long-term outcomes depend on continuous treatment engagement, and successful transitioning from pediatric to adult care requires careful planning, early preparation, and collaboration between pediatric and adult clinicians. Targeting functional outcomes and quality of life in addition to symptom remission can improve overall patient well-being. Comprehensive evaluations, age-specific assessments, and targeted interventions are needed to address the unique challenges of EOS and COS.