Clinical effectiveness of the psychological therapy Mental Health Intervention for Children with Epilepsy in addition to usual care compared with assessment-enhanced usual care alone: a multicentre, randomised controlled clinical trial in the UK.

BACKGROUND: Mental health difficulties are common in children and young people with chronic health conditions, but many of those in need do not access evidence-based psychological treatments. The study aim was to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of integrated mental health treatment for children and young people with epilepsy, a common chronic health condition known to be associated with a particularly high rate of co-occurring mental health difficulties. METHODS: We conducted a parallel group, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial of participants aged 3-18 years, attending epilepsy clinics across England and Northern Ireland who met diagnostic criteria for a common mental health disorder. Participants were randomised (1:1; using an independent web-based system) to receive the Mental Health Intervention for Children with Epilepsy (MICE) in addition to usual care, or assessment-enhanced usual care alone (control). Children and young people in both groups received a full diagnostic mental health assessment. MICE was a modular psychological intervention designed to treat common mental health conditions in children and young people using evidence-based approaches such as cognitive behaviour therapy and behavioural parenting strategies. Usual care for mental health disorders varied by site but typically included referral to appropriate services. Participants, along with their caregivers, and clinicians were not masked to treatment allocation but statisticians were masked until the point of analysis. The primary outcome, analysed by modified intention-to-treat, was the parent-report Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) at 6 months post-randomisation. The study is complete and registered with ISRCTN (57823197). FINDINGS: 1401 young people were potentially deemed eligible for study inclusion. Following the exclusion of 531 young people, 870 participants were assessed for eligibility and completed the SDQ, and 480 caregivers provided consent for study inclusion between May 20, 2019, and Jan 31, 2022. Between Aug 28, 2019, and Feb 21, 2022, 334 participants (mean ages 10·5 years [SD 3·6] in the MICE group vs 10·3 [4·0] in control group at baseline) were randomly assigned to an intervention using minimisation balanced by age, primary mental health disorder, diagnosis of intellectual disability, and autistic spectrum disorder at baseline. 168 (50%) of the participants were female and 166 (50%) were male. 166 participants were randomly assigned to the MICE group and 168 were randomly assigned to the control group. At 6 months, the mean SDQ difficulties for the 148 participants in the MICE group was 17·6 (SD 6·3) and 19·6 (6·1) for the 148 participants in the control group. The adjusted effect of MICE was -1·7 (95% CI -2·8 to -0·5; p=0·0040; Cohen's d, 0·3). 14 (8%) patients in the MICE group experienced at least one serious adverse event compared with 24 (14%) in the control group. 68% percent of serious adverse events (50 events) were admission due to seizures. INTERPRETATION: MICE was superior to assessment-enhanced usual care in improving symptoms of emotional and behavioural difficulties in young people with epilepsy and common mental health disorders. The trial therefore shows that mental health comorbidities can be effectively and safely treated by a variety of clinicians, utilising an integrated intervention across ages and in the context of intellectual disability and autism. The evidence from this trial suggests that such a model should be fully embedded in epilepsy services and serves as a model for other chronic health conditions in young people. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and Epilepsy Research UK Endeavour Project Grant.

Costs of opioid overdose education and naloxone distribution in New York City.

Background: Naloxone is an opioid antagonist medication that can be administered by lay people or medical professionals to reverse opioid overdoses and reduce overdose mortality. Cost was identified as a potential barrier to providing expanded overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) in New York City (NYC) in 2017. We estimated the cost of delivering OEND for different types of opioid overdose prevention programs (OOPPs) in NYC. Methods: We interviewed naloxone coordinators at 11 syringe service programs (SSPs) and 10 purposively sampled non-SSPs in NYC from December 2017 to September 2019. The samples included diverse non-SSP program types, program sizes, and OEND funding sources. We calculated one-time start up costs and ongoing operating costs using micro-costing methods to estimate the cost of personnel time and materials for OEND activities from the program perspective, but excluding naloxone kit costs. Results: Implementing an OEND program required a one-time median startup cost of $874 for SSPs and $2,548 for other programs excluding overhead, with 80% of those costs attributed to time and travel for training staff. SSPs spent a median of $90 per staff member trained and non-SSPs spent $150 per staff member. The median monthly cost of OEND program activities excluding overhead was $1,579 for SSPs and $2,529 for non-SSPs. The costs for non-SSPs varied by size, with larger, multi-site programs having higher median costs compared to single-site programs. The estimated median cost per kit dispensed excluding and including overhead was $19 versus $25 per kit for SSPs, and $36 versus $43 per kit for non-SSPs, respectively. Conclusions: OEND operating costs vary by program type and number of sites. Funders should consider that providing free naloxone to OEND programs does not cover full operating costs. Further exploration of cost-effectiveness and program efficiency should be considered across different types of OEND settings.

Optimising Evidence-Based Psychological Treatment for the Mental Health Needs of Children with Epilepsy: Principles and Methods.

There are potent evidence-based psychological treatments for youth with mental health needs, yet they are rarely implemented in clinical practice, especially for youth with mental health disorders in the context of chronic physical illness such as epilepsy. Implementation science, the study of the translation of research into practice, can promote the uptake of existing effective interventions in routine clinical practice and aid the sustainable integration of psychological treatments with routine health care. The aim of this report was to use four implementation science methods to develop a version of an existing effective psychological treatment for mental health disorders [the Modular Approach to Treatment of Children with Anxiety, Depression or Conduct Problems (MATCH-ADTC)] for use within paediatric epilepsy services: (a) literature search; (b) iterative focus groups underpinned by normalisation process theory; (c) Plan-Do-Study-Act methods; and (d) qualitative patient interviews. Findings: Three modifications were deemed necessary to facilitate implementation in children with both mental health disorders and epilepsy. These were (a) a universal brief psychoeducational component addressing the relationship between epilepsy and mental health; (b) supplementary, conditionally activated interventions addressing stigma, parental mental health and the transition to adulthood; and (c) additional training and supervision. The intervention needed relatively little alteration for implementation in paediatric epilepsy services. The modified treatment reflected the scientific literature and the views of clinicians and service users. The multi-method approach used in this report can serve as a model for implementation of evidence-based psychological treatments for children with mental health needs in the context of other chronic illnesses.