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.

Supporting employers and their employees with Mental hEalth problems to remain eNgaged and producTive at wORk (MENTOR): A feasibility randomised controlled trial protocol.

Employees with mental health problems often struggle to remain in employment. During the COVID-19 pandemic, these employees face multiple additional stressors, which are likely to worsen their mental health and work productivity. Currently, it is unclear how to best support employees with mental health problems (and their managers) to improve wellbeing and productivity. We aim to develop a new intervention (MENTOR) that will jointly involve employees, managers, and a new professional (mental health employment liaison worker, MHELW), to help employees who are still at work with a mental health condition and currently receiving professional support for their mental health. A feasibility pilot study will then be undertaken to examine the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention from the perspective of employees and line managers. The study involves a feasibility randomised controlled study comparing outcomes of participants randomised to receive the intervention (MENTOR) with wait-list controls. Participants allocated to the waitlist control group will receive the intervention after three months. We aim to randomise 56 employee-manager pairs recruited from multiple organisations in the Midlands region of England. An intervention including 10 sessions for employees and managers (3 individual sessions and 4 joint sessions) will be delivered over 12 weeks by trained MHELWs. Primary outcomes include measures of feasibility and acceptability of the intervention and work productivity. Secondary outcomes include mental health outcomes. Qualitative interviews will be undertaken with a purposively selected sub-sample of employees and line managers at three-month post-intervention assessment. To our knowledge, this will be the first trial with a joint employee-manager intervention delivered by MHELWs. Anticipated challenges are dual-level consent (employees and managers), participants' attrition, and recruitment strategies. If the intervention and trial processes are shown to be feasible and acceptable, the outcomes from this study will inform future randomised controlled trials. Trial registration: This trial is pre-registered with the ISRCTN registry, registration number: ISRCTN79256498. Protocol version: 3.0_March_2023. https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN79256498.

Effects of a hybrid digital cognitive-behavioural therapy for insomnia and emotion regulation in the workplace (SLEEP): study protocol for a randomised waitlist control trial.

INTRODUCTION: This trial tests the efficacy of implementing a hybrid digital cognitive-behavioural therapy for insomnia (dCBT-I) and emotion regulation (ER) in the workplace. The study protocol follows the SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Intervention Trials) 2013 recommendations. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a mixed methods evaluation with a two-arm randomised waitlist control design of a 6-week dCBT-I+ER intervention through self-guided online platform and four videoconferencing therapy sessions. A process evaluation will examine the fidelity of delivery and experiences of the intervention. The primary outcomes are the Insomnia Severity Index, the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and the Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7. The secondary outcomes are job productivity, job satisfaction, well-being, quality of life, self-reported (sleep diary data) and objective (actigraphy) sleep parameters, and usage of online intervention platform. Assessments take place at baseline (T0), week 8 post-treatment (T1) and week 12 postrandomisation (T2). We will recruit 156 workers with sleep and ER problems ranging from subclinical to clinical levels not engaged in treatment at the time of the trial. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Full approval was given by the University of Warwick Biomedical and Research Ethics Committee (BSREC 45/20-21). The current protocol version is 2.9_Dec21. Publication of results will inform the scientific, clinical and business communities through peer-reviewed articles, webinars, conferences and newsletters. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN13596153.

Digital cognitive behavioural therapy intervention in the workplace: study protocol for a feasibility randomised waitlist-controlled trial to improve employee mental well-being, engagement and productivity.

INTRODUCTION: One in six workers experience some form of mental health problems at work costing the UK economy an estimated £70 billion/year. Digital interventions provide low cost and easily scalable delivery methods to implement psychological interventions in the workplace. This trial tests the feasibility of implementing a self-guided 8-week digital cognitive behavioural therapy intervention for subthreshold to clinical depression and/or anxiety versus waitlist control (ie, life as usual) in the workplace. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Feasibility of implementation will be tested using a mixed-methods evaluation of the two-arm randomised waitlist-control trial. Evaluation will include examination of organisational buy-in, and the engagement of employees through the trial indicated by the completion of outcome measures. In addition, we also explore how participants use the platform, the appropriateness of the analysis both with reference to the outcome measures and linear modelling. Finally, we examine the acceptability of the intervention based on participants experiences using qualitative interviews. Assessments take place at baseline (T0), at 8 weeks post-treatment (T1), at short-term follow-up 4 weeks post-treatment (T2) and long-term follow-ups (6 and 12 months after-end of treatment). We will recruit from 1 July 2021 to 31 December 2021 for employees and self-employed workers with depression and anxiety symptoms (subclinical and clinical levels) who are not seeking or engaged in treatment at the time of the trial. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Full approval was given by the University of Warwick Biomedical and Research Ethics Committee (BSREC 45/20-21). The current protocol version is 2.8 (August 2021). Publication of results in peer-reviewed journals will inform the scientific, clinical and business communities. We will disseminate results through webinars, conferences, newsletter as well as a lay summary of results on the study website (mhpp.me). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN31161020.

Using e-diaries to investigate ADHD - State-of-the-art and the promising feature of just-in-time-adaptive interventions.

Attention-deficit/hyperactive disorder (ADHD) is characterized by symptoms which are dynamic in nature: states of hyperactivity, inattention and impulsivity as core symptoms, and emotion dysregulation as associated feature. Although tremendous work has been done to investigate between-subject differences (how patients with ADHD differ from healthy controls or patients with other disorders), little is known about the relationship between symptoms with triggers and contexts, that may allow us to better understand their causes and consequences. Understanding the temporal associations between symptoms and environmental triggers in an ecologically valid manner may be the basis to developing just-in-time adaptive interventions. Fortunately, recent years have seen advances in methodology, hardware and innovative statistical approaches to study dynamic processes in daily life. In this narrative review, we provide a description of the methodology (ambulatory assessment), summarize the existing literature in ADHD, and discuss future prospects for these methods, namely mobile sensing to assess contextual information, real-time analyses and just-in-time adaptive interventions.

Comparable emotional dynamics in women with ADHD and borderline personality disorder.

BACKGROUND: Emotional dysregulation (ED) is a core diagnostic symptom in borderline personality disorder (BPD) and an associated feature of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). We aimed to investigate differences in dynamical indices of ED in daily life in ADHD and BPD. METHODS: We used experience sampling method (ESM) and multilevel modelling to assess momentary changes in reports of affective symptoms, and retrospective questionnaire measures of ED in a sample of 98 adult females with ADHD, BPD, comorbid ADHD+BPD and healthy controls. RESULTS: We found marked differences between the clinical groups and healthy controls. However, the ESM assessments did not show differences in the intensity of feeling angry and irritable, and the instability of feeling sad, irritable and angry, findings paralleled by data from retrospective questionnaires. The heightened intensity in negative emotions in the clinical groups compared to controls was only partially explained by bad events at the time of reporting negative emotions, suggesting both reactive and endogenous influences on ED in both ADHD and BPD. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the view that ED is a valuable trans-diagnostic aspect of psychopathology in both ADHD and BPD, with similar levels of intensity and instability. These findings suggest that the presence or severity of ED should not be used in clinical practice to distinguish between the two disorders.

Wandering minds in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and borderline personality disorder.

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and borderline personality disorder (BPD) have overlapping symptoms. We proposed that excessive spontaneous mind wandering (MW-S) might reflect a component of psychopathology that distinguishes ADHD from BPD. Using a questionnaire measure of MW-S and an experience sampling method, we investigated MW-S in daily life, in 28 ADHD, 19 BPD, 22 comorbid ADHD+BPD, and 29 control females. The clinical groups reported heightened frequency and intensity of MW-S compared to controls, but no differences from each other. When controlling for depression and anxiety, significant differences only persisted between controls and ADHD, who also showed elevated intensity of MW-S compared to BPD and comorbid ADHD+BPD. We found no MW-S instability differences amongst clinical cases as well as cases versus controls. Negative content of MW-S was higher in BPD and comorbid ADHD+BPD compared to controls, with no differences between ADHD and controls. When controlling for depression/anxiety, the differences between BPD and comorbid ADHD+BPD and controls dissipated. MW-S is a trans-diagnostic process present in both ADHD and BPD. Yet, the underlying mechanisms of this experience may be driven by anxiety/depression in BPD but reflect a core process in ADHD.

Emotion dysregulation in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and borderline personality disorder.

There is ongoing debate on the overlap between Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD), particularly regarding emotion dysregulation (ED). In this paper, we present a narrative review of the available evidence on the association of these two disorders from several standpoints. First, we discuss the unique and shared diagnostic criteria for ADHD and BPD, focusing particularly on ED. We consider the methodology of ecological momentary assessment and discuss why this approach could be an alternative and more accurate way to qualitatively distinguish between ADHD and BPD. We summarise key findings on the genetic and environmental risk factors for ADHD and BPD and the extent to which there are shared or unique aetiological and neurobiological risk factors. Finally, we discuss the clinical relevance of considering both disorders in the assessment of patients presenting with trait-like behavioural syndromes, distinguishing the two conditions and implications for treatment.