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.

Distress, trauma, and recovery: adjustment to first episode psychosis.

OBJECTIVE: To understand the experiences that people with early psychosis are adjusting to and their perceived barriers to recovery. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with eight participants. Grounded Theory was applied to the design and analysis. Sampling and coding ceased when saturation of the data was reached. Respondent validation was sought from participants. RESULTS: A theoretical model was developed using Strauss and Corbin's (1998) framework. A core category of distress was elicited, which was evident in all participants' accounts of their recovery. Overall six main categories were identified and it was proposed that individuals were adjusting to the distress of past experiences, uncertainty, a challenged identity, being in a psychiatric system, the reaction of others and social disadvantage. CONCLUSIONS: Recovery from the distress and trauma of early psychosis does not simply involve adjustment to and recovery from a single experience or set of symptoms. The results are discussed in relation to trauma, developmental, and social inequality frameworks. Specific implications for clinical practice include incorporating the findings within formulations, developing interventions that focus on trauma, identity, and uncertainty as well as addressing the social and systemic issues identified.