Severe COVID anxiety among adults in the United Kingdom: cohort study and nested feasibility trial.

BACKGROUND: People with severe COVID anxiety have poor mental health and impaired functioning, but the course of severe COVID anxiety is unknown and the quality of evidence on the acceptability and impact of psychological interventions is low. METHODS: A quantitative cohort study with a nested feasibility trial. Potential participants aged 18 and over, living in the UK with severe COVID anxiety, were recruited online and from primary care services. We examined levels of COVID anxiety in the six months after recruitment, and factors that influenced this, using linear regression. Those scoring above 20 on the short Health Anxiety Inventory were invited to participate in a feasibility trial of remotely delivered Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for Health Anxiety (CBT-HA). Exclusion criteria were recent COVID-19, current self-isolation, or current receipt of psychological treatment. Key outcomes for the feasibility trial were the level of uptake of CBT-HA and the rate of follow-up. RESULTS: 204 (70.2%) of 285 people who took part in the cohort study completed the six month follow-up, for whom levels of COVID anxiety fell from 12.4 at baseline to 6.8 at six months (difference = -5.5, 95% CI = -6.0 to -4.9). Reductions in COVID anxiety were lower among older people, those living with a vulnerable person, those with lower baseline COVID anxiety, and those with higher levels of generalised anxiety and health anxiety at baseline. 36 (90%) of 40 participants enrolled in the nested feasibility trial were followed up at six months. 17 (80.9%) of 21 people in the active arm of the trial received four or more sessions of CBT-HA. We found improved mental health and social functioning among those in the active, but not the control arm of the trial (Mean difference in total score on the Work and Social Adjustment Scale between baseline and follow up, was 9.7 (95% CI = 5.8-13.6) among those in the active, and 1.0 (95% C.I. = -4.6 to 6.6) among those in the control arm of the trial. CONCLUSIONS: While the mental health of people with severe COVID anxiety appears to improve over time, many continue to experience high levels of anxiety and poor social functioning. Health anxiety is highly prevalent among people with severe COVID anxiety and may provide a target for psychological treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospectively registered at ISRCTN14973494 on 09/09/2021.

The association of severe COVID anxiety with poor social functioning, quality of life, and protective behaviours among adults in United Kingdom: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Anxiety about COVID-19 is common. For most people this is an appropriate response to the loss of livelihoods and loved-ones, disruptions to social networks, and uncertainty about the future. However, for others these anxieties relate to contracting the virus itself, a phenomenon termed COVID anxiety. Little is known about the characteristics of people with severe COVID anxiety or the impact it has on their daily lives. METHODS: We conducted a two-phase cross-sectional survey of people aged 18 or over who were living in United Kingdom, self-identified as anxious about COVID-19, and had a score of ≥9 on the Coronavirus Anxiety Scale. We recruited participants nationally through online adverts and locally via primary care services in London. Data on demographic and clinical factors were used in multiple regression modelling to examine the greatest contributors to functional impairment, poor health-related quality of life and protective behaviours in this sample of individuals with severe COVID anxiety. RESULTS: We recruited 306 people with severe COVID anxiety between January and September 2021. Most were female (n = 246, 81.2%); they had a median age of 41 (range = 18-83). The majority of participants also had generalised anxiety (n = 270, 91.5%), depression (n = 247, 85.5%), and a quarter (n = 79, 26.3%) reported a physical health condition which put them at increased risk of hospitalisation with COVID-19. Half had severe social dysfunction (n = 151, 52.4%). One in ten reported never leaving their home, one in three washed all items brought into their house, one in five washed their hands constantly, and one in five of those with children reported not sending them to school because of fears of COVID-19. Increasing co-morbid depressive symptoms best explained functional impairment and poor quality of life after controlling for other factors. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the high degree of co-occuring mental health problems, and the extent of functional impairment and poor health-related quality of life among people with severe COVID anxiety. Further research is needed to establish the course of severe COVID anxiety as the pandemic progresses, and steps that can be taken to support people who experience this distress.

The clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of clozapine for inpatients with severe borderline personality disorder (CALMED study): a randomised placebo-controlled trial.

Background: Data from case series suggest that clozapine may benefit inpatients with borderline personality disorder (BPD), but randomised trials have not been conducted. Methods: Multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. We aimed to recruit 222 inpatients with severe BPD aged 18 or over, who had failed to respond to other antipsychotic medications. We randomly allocated participants on a 1:1 ratio to receive up to 400 mg of clozapine per day or an inert placebo using a remote web-based randomisation service. The primary outcome was total score on the Zanarini Rating scale for Borderline Personality Disorder (ZAN-BPD) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included self-harm, aggression, resource use and costs, side effects and adverse events. We used a modified intention to treat analysis (mITT) restricted to those who took one or more dose of trial medication, using a general linear model fitted at 6 months adjusted for baseline score, allocation group and site. Results: The study closed early due to poor recruitment and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Of 29 study participants, 24 (83%) were followed up at 6 months, of whom 21 (72%) were included in the mITT analysis. At 6 months, 11 (73%) participants assigned to clozapine and 6 (43%) of those assigned to placebo were still taking trial medication. Adjusted difference in mean total ZAN-BPD score at 6 months was -3.86 (95% Confidence Intervals = -10.04 to 2.32). There were 14 serious adverse events; 6 in the clozapine arm and 8 in the placebo arm of the trial. There was little difference in the cost of care between groups. Interpretation: We recruited insufficient participants to test the primary hypothesis. The study findings highlight problems in conducting placebo-controlled trials of clozapine and in using clozapine for people with BPD, outside specialist inpatient mental health units. Trial registration: ISRCTN18352058. https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN18352058.

Severe COVID-19 anxiety among adults in the UK: protocol for a cohort study and nested feasibility trial of modified cognitive-behavioural therapy for health anxiety.

INTRODUCTION: Some people are so anxious about COVID-19 that it impairs their functioning. However, little is known about the course of severe COVID-19 anxiety or what can be done to help people who experience it. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Cohort study with a nested feasibility trial with follow-up at 3 and 6 months. We recruited 306 people who were aged 18 and over, lived in the UK and had severe COVID-19 anxiety (indicated by a score of 9 or more on the Coronavirus Anxiety Scale (CAS)). To take part in the nested feasibility trial, participants also had to have a score of 20 or more on the Short Health Anxiety Inventory. We excluded people from the trial if they had had COVID-19 within the previous 4 weeks, if they were currently self-isolating or if they were already receiving psychological treatment.We publicised the study nationally through adverts, social media and posts on message boards. We also recruited participants via clinicians working in primary and secondary care NHS services in London. All those in the active arm will be offered 5-10 sessions of remotely delivered modified cognitive-behavioural therapy for health anxiety (CBT-HA). We will examine the proportion of participants who remain above threshold on the CAS at 3 and 6 months and factors that influence levels of COVID-19 anxiety over 6 months using mixed effects logistic regression. The key feasibility metrics for the nested trial are the level of uptake of CBT-HA and the rate of follow-up. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approved by Leicester Central Research Ethics Committee (reference: 20/EM/0238). The results of the study will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN14973494.

Patient experience of lasting negative effects of psychological interventions for anxiety and depression in secondary mental health care services: a national cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Patients who undergo psychological treatment can report both negative and positive effects, but evidence of factors influencing the likelihood of negative effects is limited. AIMS: To identify aspects of the organisation and delivery of secondary care psychological treatment services that are associated with patient experiences of negative effects. METHOD: Cross-sectional survey of people with anxiety and depression who ended psychological treatment delivered by 50 NHS trusts in England. Respondents were asked about how their treatment was organised and delivered and whether they experienced lasting negative effects. RESULTS: Of 662 respondents, 90 (14.1%) reported experiencing lasting negative effects. People over the age of 65 were less likely than younger respondents to report negative effects. There was an association between reporting neutral or negative effects and not being referred at what respondents considered to be the right time (OR = 1.712, 95% CI = 1.078-2.726), not receiving the right number of sessions (OR = 3.105, 95% CI = 1.934-4.987), and not discussing progress with their therapist (OR 2.063, 95% CI = 1.290-3.301). CONCLUSIONS: One in seven patients who took part in this survey reported lasting negative effects from psychological treatment. Steps should be taken to prepare people for the potential for negative experiences of treatment, and progress reviewed during therapy in an effort to identify and prevent negative effects.