Cognitive Analytic Therapy for psychosis: A case series.

OBJECTIVES: Cognitive Analytic Therapy (CAT) is an effective psychological intervention for several different mental health conditions. However, whether it is acceptable, safe, and beneficial for people with psychosis remains unclear, as is the feasibility of providing and evaluating it within a research context. The aim of this study was to begin to address these questions and to obtain for the first time a rich and detailed understanding of the experience of receiving CAT for psychosis. DESIGN: A mixed-methods case series design. METHOD: Seven individuals who experienced non-affective psychosis received CAT. They completed assessments at the start of CAT, 16 weeks, and 28 weeks post-baseline. Qualitative interviews were completed with four individuals following completion of or withdrawal from therapy. RESULTS: Six participants attended at least four sessions of therapy and four went on to complete therapy. There were no serious adverse events, and self-reported adverse experiences were minimal. Qualitative interviews suggested CAT is acceptable and provided a way to understand and work therapeutically with psychosis. There was limited evidence of change in psychotic symptoms, but improvement in perceived recovery and personality integration was observed. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that CAT is a safe and acceptable intervention for psychosis. Personality integration, perceived recovery, and functioning are relevant outcomes for future evaluations of CAT for psychosis. PRACTITIONER POINTS: It is feasible to conduct research evaluating CAT for people with psychosis. Within this case series, CAT appears acceptable and safe to individuals with psychosis. Within this case series, clients reported that CAT was a positive and helpful experience. There is a mixed picture with regard to secondary outcomes, but the design and aims of this case series limit conclusion that can be drawn from this data.

Assessing the Knowledge, Attitudes and Behaviors of Human and Animal Health Students towards Antibiotic Use and Resistance: A Pilot Cross-Sectional Study in the UK.

The Global Action Plan on Antimicrobial Resistance highlights the importance of training all healthcare professionals. No study has assessed patterns of students' knowledge, attitudes and practices concerning antibiotic use simultaneously across different healthcare course types. We conducted a cross-sectional multi-center survey among UK students. The survey was advertised through local survey coordinators at 25 universities. The online survey was accessible from 10th October to 17th November 2016 (before European Antibiotic Awareness Day). A total of 255 students from 25 universities participated, including students on medicine, pharmacy, nursing, physician associate, dentistry and veterinary medicine courses. Antibiotic resistance was considered to be a more important global challenge than climate change, obesity or food security (p < 0.001). Most students (95%) believed that antibiotic resistance will be a problem for their future practice, but fewer (69%) thought that the antibiotics they will prescribe, administer or dispense will contribute to the problem. A fifth of students felt they had sufficient knowledge of antibiotic use for their future work. Our exploratory study suggests that UK human and animal healthcare students are aware of the importance of antibiotic resistance, but many still have certain misconceptions. Campaigns and improved educational efforts applying behavioral insights methodology could address these.