Bridging the gap from medical to psychological safety assessment: consensus study in a digital mental health context.

BACKGROUND: Digital Mental Health Interventions (DMHIs) that meet the definition of a medical device are regulated by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) in the UK. The MHRA uses procedures that were originally developed for pharmaceuticals to assess the safety of DMHIs. There is recognition that this may not be ideal, as is evident by an ongoing consultation for reform led by the MHRA and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. AIMS: The aim of this study was to generate an experts' consensus on how the medical regulatory method used for assessing safety could best be adapted for DMHIs. METHOD: An online Delphi study containing three rounds was conducted with an international panel of 20 experts with experience/knowledge in the field of UK digital mental health. RESULTS: Sixty-four items were generated, of which 41 achieved consensus (64%). Consensus emerged around ten recommendations, falling into five main themes: Enhancing the quality of adverse events data in DMHIs; Re-defining serious adverse events for DMHIs; Reassessing short-term symptom deterioration in psychological interventions as a therapeutic risk; Maximising the benefit of the Yellow Card Scheme; and Developing a harmonised approach for assessing the safety of psychological interventions in general. CONCLUSION: The implementation of the recommendations provided by this consensus could improve the assessment of safety of DMHIs, making them more effective in detecting and mitigating risk.

Internet-Delivered Exposure and Response Prevention for Pediatric Tourette Syndrome: 12-Month Follow-Up of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Behavior therapy is a recommended intervention for Tourette syndrome (TS) and chronic tic disorder (CTD), but availability is limited and long-term effects are uncertain. Objective: To investigate the long-term efficacy and cost-effectiveness of therapist-supported, internet-delivered exposure and response prevention (ERP) vs psychoeducation for youths with TS or CTD. Design, Setting, And Participants: This 12-month controlled follow-up of a parallel group, superiority randomized clinical trial was conducted at a research clinic in Stockholm, Sweden, with nationwide recruitment. In total, 221 participants aged 9 to 17 years with TS or CTD were enrolled between April 26, 2019, and April 9, 2021, of whom 208 (94%) provided 12-month follow-up data. Final follow-up data were collected on June 29, 2022. Outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation throughout the study. Interventions: A total of 111 participants were originally randomly allocated to 10 weeks of therapist-supported, internet-delivered ERP and 110 participants to therapist-supported, internet-delivered psychoeducation. Main Outcomes And Measures: The primary outcome was within-group change in tic severity, measured by the Total Tic Severity Score of the Yale Global Tic Severity Scale (YGTSS-TTSS), from the 3-month follow-up to the 12-month follow-up. Treatment response was defined as 1 (very much improved) or 2 (much improved) on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale. Analyses were intention-to-treat and followed the plan prespecified in the published study protocol. A health economic evaluation was performed from 3 perspectives: health care organization (including direct costs for treatment provided in the study), health care sector (additionally including health care resource use outside of the study), and societal (additionally including costs beyond health care [eg, parent's absenteeism from work]). Results: In total, 221 participants were recruited (mean [SD] age, 12.1 [2.3] years; 152 [69%] male). According to the YGTSS-TTSS, there were no statistically significant changes in tic severity from the 3-month to the 12-month follow-up in either group (ERP coefficient, -0.52 [95% CI, -1.26 to 0.21]; P = .16; psychoeducation coefficient, 0.00 [95% CI, -0.78 to 0.78]; P > .99). A secondary analysis including all assessment points (baseline to 12-month follow-up) showed no statistically significant between-group difference in tic severity from baseline to the 12-month follow-up (coefficient, -0.38 [95% CI, -1.11 to 0.35]; P = .30). Treatment response rates were similar in both groups (55% in ERP and 50% in psychoeducation; odds ratio, 1.25 [95% CI, 0.73-2.16]; P = .42) at the 12-month follow-up. The health economic evaluation showed that, from a health care sector perspective, ERP produced more quality-adjusted life years (0.01 [95% CI, -0.01 to 0.03]) and lower costs (adjusted mean difference -$84.48 [95% CI, -$440.20 to $977.60]) than psychoeducation at the 12-month follow-up. From the health care organization and societal perspectives, ERP produced more quality-adjusted life years at higher costs, with 65% to 78% probability of ERP being cost-effective compared with psychoeducation when using a willingness-to-pay threshold of US $79 000. Conclusions And Relevance: There were no statistically significant changes in tic severity from the 3-month through to the 12-month follow-up in either group. The ERP intervention was not superior to psychoeducation at any time point. While ERP was not superior to psychoeducation alone in reducing tic severity at the end of the follow-up period, ERP is recommended for clinical implementation due to its likely cost-effectiveness and support from previous literature. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03916055.

Online remote behavioural intervention for tics in 9- to 17-year-olds: the ORBIT RCT with embedded process and economic evaluation.

Background: Behavioural therapy for tics is difficult to access, and little is known about its effectiveness when delivered online. Objective: To investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of an online-delivered, therapist- and parent-supported therapy for young people with tic disorders. Design: Single-blind, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial, with 3-month (primary end point) and 6-month post-randomisation follow-up. Participants were individually randomised (1 : 1), using on online system, with block randomisations, stratified by site. Naturalistic follow-up was conducted at 12 and 18 months post-randomisation when participants were free to access non-trial interventions. A subset of participants participated in a process evaluation. Setting: Two hospitals (London and Nottingham) in England also accepting referrals from patient identification centres and online self-referrals. Participants: Children aged 9-17 years (1) with Tourette syndrome or chronic tic disorder, (2) with a Yale Global Tic Severity Scale-total tic severity score of 15 or more (or > 10 with only motor or vocal tics) and (3) having not received behavioural therapy for tics in the past 12 months or started/stopped medication for tics within the past 2 months. Interventions: Either 10 weeks of online, remotely delivered, therapist-supported exposure and response prevention therapy (intervention group) or online psychoeducation (control). Outcome: Primary outcome: Yale Global Tic Severity Scale-total tic severity score 3 months post-randomisation; analysis done in all randomised patients for whom data were available. Secondary outcomes included low mood, anxiety, treatment satisfaction and health resource use. Quality-adjusted life-years are derived from parent-completed quality-of-life measures. All trial staff, statisticians and the chief investigator were masked to group allocation. Results: Two hundred and twenty-four participants were randomised to the intervention (n = 112) or control (n = 112) group. Participants were mostly male (n = 177; 79%), with a mean age of 12 years. At 3 months the estimated mean difference in Yale Global Tic Severity Scale-total tic severity score between the groups adjusted for baseline and site was -2.29 points (95% confidence interval -3.86 to -0.71) in favour of therapy (effect size -0.31, 95% confidence interval -0.52 to -0.10). This effect was sustained throughout to the final follow-up at 18 months (-2.01 points, 95% confidence interval -3.86 to -0.15; effect size -0.27, 95% confidence interval -0.52 to -0.02). At 18 months the mean incremental cost per participant of the intervention compared to the control was £662 (95% confidence interval -£59 to £1384), with a mean incremental quality-adjusted life-year of 0.040 (95% confidence interval -0.004 to 0.083) per participant. The mean incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained was £16,708. The intervention was acceptable and delivered with high fidelity. Parental engagement predicted child engagement and more positive clinical outcomes. Harms: Two serious, unrelated adverse events occurred in the control group. Limitations: We cannot separate the effects of digital online delivery and the therapy itself. The sample was predominately white and British, limiting generalisability. The design did not compare to face-to-face services. Conclusion: Online, therapist-supported behavioural therapy for young people with tic disorders is clinically and cost-effective in reducing tics, with durable benefits extending up to 18 months. Future work: Future work should compare online to face-to-face therapy and explore how to embed the intervention in clinical practice. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN70758207; ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03483493). The trial is now complete. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Technology Assessment programme (project number 16/19/02) and will be published in full in Health and Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 18. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

It can be difficult for children and young people with tics to access therapy. This is because there are not enough trained tic therapists. Online remote behavioural intervention for tics was a clinical trial to see whether an online platform that delivered two different types of interventions could help tics. One intervention focused on techniques to control tics; this type of therapy is called exposure and response prevention. The other intervention was psychoeducation, where participants learned about the nature of tics but not how to control them. The online remote behavioural intervention for tics interventions also involved help from a therapist and support from a parent. Participants were aged 9­17 years with Tourette syndrome/chronic tic disorder and were recruited from 16 clinics, two study sites (Nottingham and London) or via online self-referral. All individuals who were eligible for the online remote behavioural intervention for tics trial were randomised in a 50/50 split by researchers who were unaware of which treatment was being given. Participants received either 10 weeks of online exposure and response prevention or 10 weeks of online psychoeducation. A total of 224 children and young people participated: 112 allocated to exposure and response prevention and 112 to psychoeducation. Tics decreased more in the exposure and response prevention group (16% reduction) than in the psychoeducation group (6% reduction) 3 months after treatment. This difference is considered a clinically important difference in tic reduction. The treatment continued to have a positive effect on tic symptoms at 6, 12 and 18 months, showing that the effects are durable. This was achieved with minimal therapist involvement. The cost of online exposure and response prevention to treat young people with tics within this study was less when compared to the cost of face-to-face therapy. The results show that exposure and response prevention is an effective behavioural therapy for tics in this specific patient group. Delivering exposure and response prevention online with minimal therapist contact can be a successful and cost-effective treatment to improve access to behavioural therapy.

Practitioner Review: Clinical utility of the QbTest for the assessment and diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder - a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Several computerised cognitive tests (e.g. continuous performance test) have been developed to support the clinical assessment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Here, we appraised the evidence-base underpinning the use of one of these tests - the QbTest - in clinical practice, by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis investigating its accuracy and clinical utility. METHODS: Based on a preregistered protocol (CRD42022377671), we searched PubMed, Medline, Ovid Embase, APA PsycINFO and Web of Science on 15th August 2022, with no language/type of document restrictions. We included studies reporting accuracy measures (e.g. sensitivity, specificity, or Area under the Receiver Operating Characteristics Curve, AUC) for QbTest in discriminating between people with and without DSM/ICD ADHD diagnosis. Risk of bias was assessed with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool (QUADAS-2). A generic inverse variance meta-analysis was conducted on AUC scores. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were calculated using a random-effects bivariate model in R. RESULTS: We included 15 studies (2,058 participants; 48.6% with ADHD). QbTest Total scores showed acceptable, rather than good, sensitivity (0.78 [95% confidence interval: 0.69; 0.85]) and specificity (0.70 [0.57; 0.81]), while subscales showed low-to-moderate sensitivity (ranging from 0.48 [0.35; 0.61] to 0.65 [0.52; 0.75]) and moderate-to-good specificity (from 0.65 [0.48; 0.78] to 0.83 [0.60; 0.94]). Pooled AUC scores suggested moderate-to-acceptable discriminative ability (Q-Total: 0.72 [0.57; 0.87]; Q-Activity: 0.67 [0.58; 0.77); Q-Inattention: 0.66 [0.59; 0.72]; Q-Impulsivity: 0.59 [0.53; 0.64]). CONCLUSIONS: When used on their own, QbTest scores available to clinicians are not sufficiently accurate in discriminating between ADHD and non-ADHD clinical cases. Therefore, the QbTest should not be used as stand-alone screening or diagnostic tool, or as a triage system for accepting individuals on the waiting-list for clinical services. However, when used as an adjunct to support a full clinical assessment, QbTest can produce efficiencies in the assessment pathway and reduce the time to diagnosis.

Long-term clinical and cost-effectiveness of a therapist-supported online remote behavioural intervention for tics in children and adolescents: extended 12- and 18-month follow-up of a single-blind randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the long-term effectiveness of behavioural therapy for tics. We aimed to assess the long-term clinical and cost-effectiveness of online therapist-supported exposure and response prevention (ERP) therapy for tics 12 and 18 months after treatment initiation. METHODS: ORBIT (online remote behavioural intervention for tics) was a two-arm (1:1 ratio), superiority, single-blind, multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing online ERP for tics with online psychoeducation. The trial was conducted across two Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services in England. Participants were recruited from these two sites, across other clinics in England, or by self-referral. This study was a naturalistic follow-up of participants at 12- and 18-month postrandomisation. Participants were permitted to use alternative treatments recommended by their clinician. The key outcome was the Yale Global Tic Severity Scale Total Tic Severity Score (YGTSS-TTSS). A full economic evaluation was conducted. Registrations are ISRCTN (ISRCTN70758207); ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03483493). RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty-four participants were enrolled: 112 to ERP and 112 to psychoeducation. The sample was predominately male (177; 79%) and of white ethnicity (195; 87%). The ERP intervention reduced baseline YGTSS-TTSS by 2.64 points (95% CI: -4.48 to -0.79) with an effect size of -0.36 (95% CI: -0.61 to -0.11) after 12 months and by 2.01 points (95% CI: -3.86 to -0.15) with an effect size of -0.27 (95% CI -0.52 to -0.02) after 18 months, compared with psychoeducation. Very few participants (<10%) started new tic treatment during follow-up. The cost difference in ERP compared with psychoeducation was £304.94 (-139.41 to 749.29). At 18 months, the cost per QALY gained was £16,708 for ERP compared with psychoeducation. CONCLUSIONS: Remotely delivered online ERP is a clinical and cost-effective intervention with durable benefits extending for up to 18 months. This represents an efficient public mental health approach to increase access to behavioural therapy and improve outcomes for tics.

Therapist-Supported Internet-Delivered Exposure and Response Prevention for Children and Adolescents With Tourette Syndrome: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The availability of behavior therapy for individuals with Tourette syndrome (TS) and chronic tic disorder (CTD) is limited. Objective: To determine the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of internet-delivered exposure and response prevention (ERP) for children and adolescents with TS or CTD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This single-masked, parallel group, superiority randomized clinical trial with nationwide recruitment was conducted at a research clinic in Stockholm, Sweden. Out of 615 individuals assessed for eligibility, 221 participants meeting diagnostic criteria for TS or CTD and aged 9 to 17 years were included in the study. Enrollment began in April 2019 and ended in April 2021. Data were analyzed between October 2021 and March 2022. Interventions: Participants were randomized to 10 weeks of therapist-supported internet-delivered ERP for tics (111 participants) or to therapist-supported internet-delivered education for tics (comparator group, 110 participants). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change in tic severity from baseline to the 3-month follow-up as measured by the Total Tic Severity Score of the Yale Global Tic Severity Scale (YGTSS-TTSS). YGTSS-TTSS assessors were masked to treatment allocation. Treatment response was operationalized as a score of 1 ("Very much improved") or 2 ("Much improved") on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale. Results: Data loss was minimal, with 216 of 221 participants (97.7%) providing primary outcome data. Among randomized participants (152 [68.8%] boys; mean [SD] age, 12.1 [2.3] years), tic severity improved significantly, with a mean reduction of 6.08 points on the YGTSS-TTSS in the ERP group (mean [SD] at baseline, 22.25 [5.60]; at 3-month follow-up, 16.17 [6.82]) and 5.29 in the comparator (mean [SD] at baseline, 23.01 [5.92]; at 3-month follow-up, 17.72 [7.11]). Intention-to-treat analyses showed that the 2 groups improved similarly over time (interaction effect, -0.53; 95% CI, -1.28 to 0.22; P = .17). Significantly more participants were classified as treatment responders in the ERP group (51 of 108 [47.2%]) than in the comparator group (31 of 108 [28.7%]) at the 3-month follow-up (odds ratio, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.27 to 3.90). ERP resulted in more treatment responders at little additional cost compared with structured education. The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained was below the Swedish willingness-to-pay threshold, at which ERP had a 66% to 76% probability of being cost-effective. Conclusions and Relevance: Both interventions were associated with clinically meaningful improvements in tic severity, but ERP led to higher response rates at little additional cost. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03916055.

The feasibility of a strategy for the remote recruitment, consenting and assessment of recent referrals: a protocol for phase 1 of the On-Line Parent Training for the Initial Management of ADHD referrals (OPTIMA).

BACKGROUND: In the UK, children with high levels of hyperactivity, impulsivity and inattention referred to clinical services with possible attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) often wait a long time for specialist diagnostic assessment. Parent training (PT) has the potential to support parents during this difficult period, especially regarding the management of challenging and disruptive behaviours that often accompany ADHD. However, traditional face-to-face PT is costly and difficult to organise in a timely way. We have created a low-cost, easily accessible PT programme delivered via a phone app, Structured E-Parenting Support (STEPS), to address this problem. The overall OPTIMA programme will evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of STEPS as a way of helping parents manage their children behaviour while on the waitlist. To ensure the timely and efficient evaluation of STEPS in OPTIMA, we have worked with children's health services to implement a remote strategy for recruitment, screening and assessment of recently referred families. Part of this strategy is incorporated into routine clinical practice and part is OPTIMA specific. Here, we present the protocol for Phase 1 of OPTIMA-a study of the feasibility of this remote strategy, as a basis for a large-scale STEPS randomised controlled trial (RCT). METHODS: This is a single arm observational feasibility study. Participants will be parents of up to 100 children aged 5-11 years with high levels of hyperactivity/impulsivity, inattention and challenging behaviour who are waiting for assessment in one of five UK child and adolescent mental health or behavioural services. Recruitment, consenting and data collection will occur remotely. The primary outcome will be the rate at which the families, who meet inclusion criteria, agree in principle to take part in a full STEPS RCT. Secondary outcomes include acceptability of remote consenting and online data collection procedures; the feasibility of collecting teacher data remotely within the required timeframe, and technical difficulties with completing online questionnaires. All parents in the study will receive access to STEPS. DISCUSSION: Establishing the feasibility of our remote recruitment, consenting and assessment strategy is a pre-requisite for the full trial of OPTIMA. It can also provide a model for future trials conducted remotely.

Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of therapist-guided internet-delivered behaviour therapy for children and adolescents with Tourette syndrome: study protocol for a single-blind randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment guidelines recommend behaviour therapy (BT) for patients with Tourette syndrome (TS) and chronic tic disorder (CTD). However, BT is rarely accessible due to limited availability of trained therapists and long travel distances to specialist clinics. Internet-delivered BT has the potential of overcoming these barriers through remote delivery of treatment with minimal therapist support. In the current protocol, we outline the design and methods of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) evaluating an internet-delivered BT programme referred to as BIP TIC. The trial's primary objective is to determine the clinical efficacy of BIP TIC for reducing tic severity in young people with TS/CTD, compared with an active control intervention. Secondary objectives are to investigate the 12-month durability of the treatment effects and to perform a health economic evaluation of the intervention. METHODS: In this single-blind superiority RCT, 220 participants (9-17 years) with TS/CTD throughout Sweden will be randomised to 10-12 weeks of either therapist-supported internet-delivered BT based on exposure with response prevention (BIP TIC) or therapist-supported internet-delivered education. Data will be collected at baseline, 3 and 5 weeks into the treatment, at post-treatment, and 3, 6, and 12 months post-treatment. The primary endpoint is the 3-month follow-up. The primary outcome is tic severity as measured by the Yale Global Tic Severity Scale - Total Tic Severity Score. Treatment response is operationalised as scores of "Very much improved" or "Much improved" on the Clinical Global Impression - Improvement scale, administered at the primary endpoint. Outcome assessors will be blind to treatment condition at all assessment points. A health economic evaluation of BIP TIC will be performed, both in the short term (primary endpoint) and the long term (12-month follow-up). There are no planned interim analyses. DISCUSSION: Participant recruitment started on 26 April 2019 and finished on 9 April 2021. The total number of included participants was 221. The final participant is expected to reach the primary endpoint in September 2021 and the 12-month follow-up in June 2022. Data analysis for the primary objective will commence after the last participant reaches the primary endpoint. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03916055 . Registered on 16 April 2019.

Therapist-supported online remote behavioural intervention for tics in children and adolescents in England (ORBIT): a multicentre, parallel group, single-blind, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Exposure and Response Prevention (ERP) is a form of behavioural therapy for tics; however, its effectiveness remains uncertain. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of internet-delivered, therapist-supported, and parent-assisted ERP for treatment of tics in children and young people with Tourette syndrome or chronic tic disorder. METHODS: This multicentre, parallel group, single-blind, randomised controlled trial was conducted across two study sites in England. Participants were recruited via 16 patient identification centres, two study sites in England (Nottingham and London), or online self-referral. Eligible participants were aged 9-17 years, had Tourette syndrome or chronic tic disorder, had not received behavioural therapy for tics in the past 12 months or were about to start, and had a Yale Global Tic Severity Scale (YGTSS) Total Tic Severity Score (TTSS) of more than 15 or more than 10 if they had only motor or vocal tics. Patients were excluded if they had started or stopped medication for tics within the past 2 months; had current alcohol or substance dependence, psychosis, suicidality, anorexia nervosa, or suspected moderate to severe intellectual disability; or presented an immediate risk to self or others; or the parent or carer was unable to speak, read, or write in English. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by masked outcome assessors to receive 10 weeks of online, remotely delivered, therapist-supported ERP or psychoeducation (active control). Outcome assessors, statisticians, health economists, the trial manager, and the chief investigator were masked to group allocation. Patients were not directly informed of their allocation, but this could be established from the content once treatment commenced and the patients were not, therefore, considered masked to treatment. The primary outcome was YGTSS-TTSS 3 months after randomisation, and analysis was done in all randomised patients for whom data were available for each timepoint and outcome. Safety analysis was by intention to treat. Longer term follow-up is ongoing. This trial is registered with ISRCTN (ISRCTN70758207) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03483493). FINDINGS: Between May 8, 2018, and Sept 30, 2019, we assessed 445 candidates for inclusion in the study. 221 potential participants were excluded (90 did not meet inclusion criteria, 84 declined to participate, and 47 unable to contact family). 224 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to ERP (n=112) or psychoeducation (n=112). The enrolled patients were mostly male (n=177; 79%) and of White ethnicity (n=195; 87%). 11 patients were lost to follow-up 3 months after randomisation in the ERP group, compared with 12 patients in the psychoeducation group. Mean YGTSS-TTSS at 3 months after randomisation was 23·9 (SD 8·2) in the ERP group and 26·8 (7·3) in the psychoeducation group. The mean total decrease in YGTSS-TTSS at 3 months was 4·5 (16%, SD 1·1) in the ERP group versus 1·6 (6%, 1·0) in the psychoeducation group. The estimated mean difference in YGTSS-TTSS change between the groups adjusted for baseline and site was -2·29 points (95% CI -3·86 to -0·71) in favour of ERP, with an effect size of -0·31 (95% CI -0·52 to -0·10). Two serious adverse events occurred (one collapse and one tic attack), both in the psychoeducation group, neither of which were related to study treatment. INTERPRETATION: ERP is an effective behavioural therapy for tics. Remotely delivered, online ERP with minimal therapist contact time represents an efficient public mental health approach to improve access to behavioural therapy for tics in children and adolescents. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research and Health and Technology Assessment.

Implementation of Telehealth Services to Assess, Monitor, and Treat Neurodevelopmental Disorders: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: In response to COVID-19, there has been increasing momentum in telehealth development and delivery. To assess the anticipated exponential growth in telehealth, it is important to accurately capture how telehealth has been used in specific mental health fields prior to the pandemic. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to highlight how telehealth has been used with clinical samples in the neurodevelopmental field, including patients with neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs), their families, and health care professionals. To identify which technologies show the greatest potential for implementation into health services, we evaluated technologies for effectiveness, economic impact, and readiness for clinical adoption. METHODS: A systematic search of literature was undertaken in April 2018 and updated until December 2019, by using the Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL Plus, EMBASE, and PsycInfo databases. Extracted data included the type of technology, how the technology was used (ie, assessment, treatment, and monitoring), participant characteristics, reported outcomes and authors' views on clinical effectiveness, user impact (ie, feasibility and acceptability), economic impact, and readiness for clinic adoption. A quality review of the research was performed in accordance with the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence. RESULTS: A total of 42 studies met the inclusion criteria. These studies included participants and family members with autism spectrum disorders (21/42, 50%), attention deficit hyperactivity disorders (8/42, 19%), attention deficit hyperactivity or autism spectrum disorders (3/42, 7%), communication disorders (7/42, 17%), and tic disorders (2/42, 5%). The focus of most studies (33/42, 79%) was on treatment, rather than assessment (4/42, 10%) or monitoring (5/42, 12%). Telehealth services demonstrated promise for being clinically effective, predominantly in relation to diagnosing and monitoring NDDs. In terms of NDD treatment, telehealth services were usually equivalent to control groups. There was some evidence of positive user and economic impacts, including increased service delivery efficiency (eg, increased treatment availability and decreased waiting times). However, these factors were not widely recorded across the studies. Telehealth was demonstrated to be cost-effective in the few studies that considered cost-effectiveness. Study quality varied, as many studies had small sample sizes and inadequate control groups. Of the 42 studies, only 11 (26%) were randomized controlled trials, 12 (29%) were case studies or case series, 6 (14%) were qualitative studies, and 5 (12%) were noncomparative trials. CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth has the potential to increase treatment availability, decrease diagnosis waiting times, and aid in NDD monitoring. Further research with more robust and adequately powered study designs that consider cost-effectiveness and increased efficiency is needed. This systematic review highlights the extent of telehealth technology use prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and the movement for investing in remote access to treatments. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42018091156; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42018091156.

Opportunities and challenges of delivering digital clinical trials: lessons learned from a randomised controlled trial of an online behavioural intervention for children and young people.

BACKGROUND: Despite being the gold standard of research to determine effectiveness, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) often struggle with participant recruitment, engagement and retention. These issues may be exacerbated when recruiting vulnerable populations, such as participants with mental health issues. We aimed to update understanding of the scope of these problems in trials of health technology and identify possible solutions through reflecting on experiences from an exemplar trial (Online Remote Behavioural Intervention for Tics; ORBIT). METHOD: We extracted anonymised data on recruitment, retention and requests for more funding and time from trials funded by the largest funder of health technology trials in the UK (the National Institute of Health Research Health Technology Assessment) between 2010 and 2020, and compared these with data from a recent, successful trial (ORBIT). ORBIT aimed to assess the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of blended online and human behavioural therapy for tics in young people. Many of the trial procedures, including recruitment, the intervention and data collection, were undertaken online. RESULTS: Data were extracted on 51 trials conducted between 2010 and 2020. Sixty per cent of trials failed to reach their original recruitment target and only 44% achieved their follow-up in the specified time frame. In contrast, ORBIT recruited to target and achieved 90% follow-up. We posit that these achievements are related to (a) judicious use of digital technology for trial procedures and (b) adequate numbers of highly trained and motivated trial staff. We provide details of both these to help other research teams plan and cost for successful trials. CONCLUSION: An approach combining human and online methods may be advantageous in facilitating trial delivery, particularly in paediatric mental health services. Given the importance of successful clinical trials in advancing healthcare delivery and the waste of human and economic resources associated with unsuccessfully delivered trials, it is imperative that trials are appropriately costed and future research focusses on improving trial design and delivery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The ORBIT trial is registered with ISRTCN ( ISRCTN70758207 ) Registered on March 20, 2018. and ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT03483493 ). Registered on March 30, 2018.

A systematic review evaluating the implementation of technologies to assess, monitor and treat neurodevelopmental disorders: A map of the current evidence.

Technology-based interventions provide an attractive option for improving service provision for neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD), for example, widening access to interventions, objective assessment, and monitoring; however, it is unclear whether there is sufficient evidence to support their use in clinical settings. This review provides an evidence map describing how technology is implemented in the assessment/diagnosis and monitoring/ treatment of NDD (Prospero CRD42018091156). Using predefined search terms in six databases, 7982 articles were identified, 808 full-texts were screened, resulting in 47 included papers. These studies were appraised and synthesised according to the following outcomes of interest: effectiveness (clinical effectiveness/ service delivery efficiencies), economic impact, and user impact (acceptability/ feasibility). The findings describe how technology is currently being utilised clinically, highlights gaps in knowledge, and discusses future research needs. Technology has been used to facilitate assessment and treatment across multiple NDD, especially Autism Spectrum (ASD) and attention-deficit/hyperactivity (ADHD) disorders. Technologies include mobile apps/tablets, robots, gaming, computerised tests, videos, and virtual reality. The outcomes presented largely focus on the clinical effectiveness of the technology, with approximately half the papers demonstrating some degree of effectiveness, however, the methodological quality of many studies is limited. Further research should focus on randomised controlled trial designs with longer follow-up periods, incorporating an economic evaluation, as well as qualitative studies including process evaluations and user impact.

The impact of a computerised test of attention and activity (QbTest) on diagnostic decision-making in children and young people with suspected attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: single-blind randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) relies on subjective methods which can lead to diagnostic uncertainty and delay. This trial evaluated the impact of providing a computerised test of attention and activity (QbTest) report on the speed and accuracy of diagnostic decision-making in children with suspected ADHD. METHODS: Randomised, parallel, single-blind controlled trial in mental health and community paediatric clinics in England. Participants were 6-17 years-old and referred for ADHD diagnostic assessment; all underwent assessment-as-usual, plus QbTest. Participants and their clinician were randomised to either receive the QbTest report immediately (QbOpen group) or the report was withheld (QbBlind group). The primary outcome was number of consultations until a diagnostic decision confirming/excluding ADHD within 6-months from baseline. Health economic cost-effectiveness and cost utility analysis was conducted. Assessing QbTest Utility in ADHD: A Randomised Controlled Trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02209116). RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-two participants were randomised to QbOpen group (123 analysed) and 135 to QbBlind group (127 analysed). Clinicians with access to the QbTest report (QbOpen) were more likely to reach a diagnostic decision about ADHD (hazard ratio 1.44, 95% CI 1.04-2.01). At 6-months, 76% of those with a QbTest report had received a diagnostic decision, compared with 50% without. QbTest reduced appointment length by 15% (time ratio 0.85, 95% CI 0.77-0.93), increased clinicians' confidence in their diagnostic decisions (odds ratio 1.77, 95% CI 1.09-2.89) and doubled the likelihood of excluding ADHD. There was no difference in diagnostic accuracy. Health economic analysis showed a position of strict dominance; however, cost savings were small suggesting that the impact of providing the QbTest report within this trial can best be viewed as 'cost neutral'. CONCLUSIONS: QbTest may increase the efficiency of ADHD assessment pathway allowing greater patient throughput with clinicians reaching diagnostic decisions faster without compromising diagnostic accuracy.

Study of user experience of an objective test (QbTest) to aid ADHD assessment and medication management: a multi-methods approach.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis and monitoring of Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) typically relies on subjective reports and observations. Objective continuous performance tests (CPTs) have been incorporated into some services to support clinical decision making. However, the feasibility and acceptability of adding such a test into routine practice is unknown. The study aimed to investigate the feasibility and acceptability of adding an objective computerised test to the routine assessment and monitoring of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with clinicians (n = 10) and families (parents/young people, n = 20) who participated in a randomised controlled trial. Additionally, the same clinicians (n = 10) and families (n = 76) completed a survey assessing their experience of the QbTest. The study took place in child and adolescent mental health and community paediatric clinics across the UK. Interview transcripts were thematically analysed. RESULTS: Interviewed clinicians and families valued the QbTest for providing an objective, valid assessment of symptoms. The QbTest was noted to facilitate communication between clinicians, families and schools. However, whereas clinicians were more unanimous on the usefulness of the QbTest, survey findings showed that, although the majority of families found the test useful, less than half felt the QbTest helped them understand the clinician's decision making around diagnosis and medication. The QbTest was seen as a potentially valuable tool to use early in the assessment process to streamline the care pathway. Although clinicians were conscious of the additional costs, these could be offset by reductions in time to diagnosis and the delivery of the test by a Healthcare Assistant. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate the QbTest is an acceptable and feasible tool to implement in routine clinical settings. Clinicians should be mindful to discuss the QbTest results with families to enable their understanding and engagement with the process. Further findings from definitive trials are required to understand the cost/benefit; however, the findings from this study support the feasibility and acceptability of integrating QbTest in the ADHD care pathway. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The findings form the implementation component of the Assessing QbTest Utility in ADHD (AQUA) Trial which is registered with the ISRCTN registry ( ISRCTN11727351 , retrospectively registered 04 July 2016) and clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT02209116 , registered 04 August 2014).

The incremental validity of a computerised assessment added to clinical rating scales to differentiate adult ADHD from autism spectrum disorder.

There is a clinical need for objective evidence-based measures that are sensitive and specific to ADHD when compared with other neurodevelopmental disorders. This study evaluated the incremental validity of adding an objective measure of activity and computerised cognitive assessment to clinical rating scales to differentiate adult ADHD from Autism spectrum disorders (ASD). Adults with ADHD (n=33) or ASD (n=25) performed the QbTest, comprising a Continuous Performance Test with motion-tracker to record physical activity. QbTest parameters measuring inattention, impulsivity and hyperactivity were combined to provide a summary score ('QbTotal'). Binary stepwise logistic regression measured the probability of assignment to the ADHD or ASD group based on scores on the Conners Adult ADHD Rating Scale-subscale E (CAARS-E) and Autism Quotient (AQ10) in the first step and then QbTotal added in the second step. The model fit was significant at step 1 (CAARS-E, AQ10) with good group classification accuracy. These predictors were retained and QbTotal was added, resulting in a significant improvement in model fit and group classification accuracy. All predictors were significant. ROC curves indicated superior specificity of QbTotal. The findings present preliminary evidence that adding QbTest to clinical rating scales may improve the differentiation of ADHD and ASD in adults.

Innovations in Practice: Piloting electronic session-by-session monitoring in Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services: a preliminary study.

BACKGROUND: Recent UK initiatives have advocated the use of session-by-session outcome measurement in CAMHS. However, little is known about the feasibility of this approach. METHOD: The PROMPT study (Patient Reported Outcome Monitoring Progress Tracker) piloted an iPad administered brief session-by-session measure (S × S) related to the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire impact supplement in three CAMHS teams. We report adherence to electronic S × S monitoring and a preliminary analysis of sensitivity to change. RESULTS: Adherence to S × S was 57%, which is higher than the completion rates for the standard set of outcome measures usually completed by clinicians and young people. S × S showed some sensitivity to change. CONCLUSIONS: Session-by-session monitoring in CAMHS is worthy of further pursuit.

Services for young people with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder transitioning from child to adult mental health services: a national survey of mental health trusts in England.

Transition from child to adult mental health services is considered to be a difficult process, particularly for individuals with neurodevelopmental disorders such as attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This article presents results from a national survey of 36 mental health National Health Service (NHS) trusts across England, the findings indicate a lack of accurate data on the number of young people with ADHD transitioning to, and being seen by, adult services. Less than half of the trusts had a specialist adult ADHD service and in only a third of the trusts were there specific commissioning arrangements for adult ADHD. Half of the trusts reported that young people with ADHD were prematurely discharged from child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) because there were no suitable adult services. There was also a lack of written transition protocols, care pathways, commissioned services for adults with ADHD and inadequate information sharing between services. The findings advocate the need to provide a better transition service underpinned by clear, structured guidelines and protocols, routine data collection and information sharing across child and adult services. An increase in the commission of specialist adult ADHD clinics is needed to ensure individuals have access to appropriate support and care.

'Mind the gap'--mapping services for young people with ADHD transitioning from child to adult mental health services.

BACKGROUND: Once considered to be a disorder restricted to childhood, Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is now recognised to persist into adult life. However, service provision for adults with ADHD is limited. Additionally, there is little guidance or research on how best to transition young people with ADHD from child to adult services. METHOD: We report the findings of a survey of 96 healthcare professionals working in children's (Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services and Community Paediatrics) and adult services across five NHS Trusts within the East Midlands region of England to gain a better understanding of the current provision of services for young people with ADHD transitioning into adult mental health services. RESULTS: Our findings indicate a lack of structured guidelines on transitioning and little communication between child and adult services. Child and adult services had differing opinions on what they felt adult services should provide for ADHD cases. Adult services reported feeling ill-prepared to deal with ADHD patients, with clinicians in these services citing a lack of specific knowledge of ADHD and a paucity of resources to deal with such cases. CONCLUSIONS: We discuss suggestions for further research, including the need to map the national provision of services for adults with ADHD, and provide recommendations for commissioned adult ADHD services. We specifically advocate an increase in ADHD-specific training for clinicians in adult services, the development of specialist adult ADHD clinics and greater involvement of Primary Care to support the work of generic adult mental health services in adult ADHD management.