Generalisation of Social Communication Skills by Autistic Children During Play-Based Assessments Across Home, School and an Unfamiliar Research Setting.

We investigated autistic children's generalisation of social communication over time across three settings during a play-based assessment with different adults and explore the potential moderating effects on generalisation of age, nonverbal IQ and level of restricted and repetitive behaviours. The social communication abilities of 248 autistic children (2-11 years, 21% female, 22% single parent, 60% white) from three UK sites were assessed from 1984 video interactions in three contexts with three different interaction partners (parent/home, teaching assistant/school, researcher/clinic) at baseline, midpoint (+ 7m) and endpoint (+ 12m) within the Paediatric Autism Communication Trial-Generalised (PACT-G), a parent-mediated social communication intervention. Children's midpoint social communication at home generalised to school at midpoint and to clinic at endpoint. Generalisation was stronger from home to school and clinic than school to home and clinic. Generalisation was not moderated by age, nonverbal IQ or restricted and repetitive behaviour. Broader child development did not explain the pattern of results. The current study is the largest study to date to explore generalisation with autistic children and provides novel insight into their generalisation of social communication skills. Further research is needed to gain a more comprehensive understanding of facilitators of generalisation across settings and interaction partners in order to develop targeted strategies for interventions to enhance outcomes for young autistic children.

Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a brief accessible cognitive behavioural therapy programme for stress in school-aged adolescents (BESST): a cluster randomised controlled trial in the UK.

BACKGROUND: Depression and anxiety are increasingly prevalent in adolescents. The Brief Educational Workshops in Secondary Schools Trial investigated the effectiveness of a brief accessible stress workshop programme for 16-18-year-olds. We aimed to investigate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the DISCOVER cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) workshop on symptoms of depression in 16-18-year-olds at 6 months compared with treatment-as-usual. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre, cluster randomised controlled trial in UK schools or colleges with sixth forms to evaluate clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a brief CBT workshop (DISCOVER) compared with treatment-as-usual. We planned to enrol 60 schools and 900 adolescents, using a self-referral system to recruit participants. Schools were randomised in a 1:1 ratio for participants to receive either the DISCOVER workshop or treatment-as-usual, stratified by site and balanced on school size and index of multiple deprivation. Participants were included if they were 16-18 years old, attending for the full school year, seeking help for stress, and fluent in English and able to provide written informed consent. The outcome assessors, senior health economist, senior statistician, and chief investigator were masked. People with lived experience were involved in the study. The primary outcome was depression symptoms measured with the Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (MFQ) at 6-month follow-up, in the intention-to-treat population of all participants with full covariate data. The trial was registered with the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN90912799). FINDINGS: 111 schools were invited to participate in the study, seven were deemed ineligible, and 47 did not provide consent. Between Oct 4, 2021, and Nov 10, 2022, 933 students at 57 schools were screened for eligibility, seven were not eligible for inclusion, and 26 did not attend the baseline meeting and assessment, resulting in 900 adolescents participating in the study. The DISCOVER group included 443 participants (295 [67%] female and 136 [31%] male) and the treatment-as-usual group included 457 participants (346 [76%] female and 92 [20%] male). 468 (52%) of the 900 participants were White, and the overall age of the participants was 17·2 years (SD 0·6). 873 (97%) adolescents were followed up in the intention-to-treat population. The primary intention-to-treat analysis (n=854) found an adjusted mean difference in MFQ of -2·06 (95% CI -3·35 to -0·76; Cohen's d=-0·17; p=0·0019) at the 6-month follow-up, indicating a clinical improvement in the DISCOVER group. The probability that DISCOVER is cost- effective compared with treatment-as-usual ranged from 61% to 78% at a £20 000 to £30 000 per quality-adjusted life-year threshold. Nine adverse events (two of which were classified as serious) were reported in the DISCOVER group and 14 (two of which were classified as serious) were reported in the treatment-as-usual group. INTERPRETATION: Our findings indicate that the DISCOVER intervention is modestly clinically effective and economically viable and could be a promising early intervention in schools. Given the importance of addressing mental health needs early in this adolescent population, additional research is warranted to explore this intervention. FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Brief Educational Workshops in Secondary Schools Trial (BESST trial), a school-based cluster randomised controlled trial of the DISCOVER workshop for 16-18-year-olds: recruitment and baseline characteristics.

BACKGROUND: The Brief Educational Workshops in Secondary Schools Trial (BESST) is an England-wide school-based cluster randomised controlled trial assessing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of an open-access psychological workshop programme (DISCOVER) for 16-18-year-olds. This baseline paper describes the self-referral and other recruitment processes used in this study and the baseline characteristics of the enrolled schools and participants. METHOD: We enrolled 900 participants from 57 Secondary schools across England from 4th October 2021 to 10th November 2022. Schools were randomised to receive either the DISCOVER day-long Stress workshop or treatment as usual which included signposting information. Participants will be followed up for 6 months with outcome data collection at baseline, 3-month, and 6-month post randomisation. RESULTS: Schools were recruited from a geographically and ethnically diverse sample across England. To reduce stigma, students were invited to self-refer into the study if they wanted help for stress. Their mean age was 17.2 (SD = 0.6), 641 (71%) were female and 411 (45.6%) were from ethnic minority groups. The general wellbeing of our sample measured using the Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (MFQ) found 314 (35%) of students exhibited symptoms of depression at baseline. Eighty percent of students reported low wellbeing on the Warwick Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (WEMWBS) suggesting that although the overall sample mean is below the cut-off for depression, the self-referral approach used in this study supports distressed students in coming forward. CONCLUSION: The BESST study will continue to follow up participants to collect outcome data and results will be analysed once all the data have been collected. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN90912799. Registered on 28 May 2020.

Long-term effects of psychosocial interventions for adolescents on depression and anxiety: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Adolescence represents a distinctive phase of development, and variables linked to this developmental period could affect the efficiency of prevention and treatment for depression and anxiety, as well as the long-term prognosis. The objectives of this study were to investigate the long-term effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for adolescents on depression and anxiety symptoms and to assess the influence of different intervention parameters on the long-term effects. Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched five databases (Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline, PsychInfo, Web of Science) and trial registers for relevant papers published between database inception and Aug 11, 2022, with no restrictions on the language or region in which the study was conducted. An updated search was performed on Oct 3, 2023. Randomised controlled trials of psychosocial interventions targeting specifically adolescents were included if they assessed outcomes at 1-year post-intervention or more. The risk of bias in the results was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2.0. Between-study heterogeneity was estimated using the I2 statistic. The primary outcome was depression and studies were pooled using a standardised mean difference, with associated 95% confidence interval, p-value and I2. The study protocol was pre-registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022348668). Findings: 57 reports (n = 46,678 participants) were included in the review. Psychosocial interventions led to small reductions in depressive symptoms, with standardised mean difference (SMD) at 1-year of -0.08 (95% CI: -0.20 to -0.03, p = 0.002, I2 = 72%), 18-months SMD = -0.12, 95% CI: -0.22 to -0.01, p = 0.03, I2 = 63%) and 2-years SMD = -0.12 (95% CI: -0.20 to -0.03, p = 0.01, I2 = 68%). Sub-group analyses indicated that targeted interventions produced stronger effects, particularly when delivered by trained mental health professionals (K = 18, SMD = -0.24, 95% CI: -0.38 to -0.10, p = 0.001, I2 = 60%). No effects were detected for anxiety at any assessment. Interpretation: Psychosocial interventions specifically targeting adolescents were shown to have small but positive effects on depression symptoms but not anxiety symptoms, which were sustained up to 2 years. These findings highlight the potential population-level preventive effects if such psychosocial interventions become widely implemented in accessible settings, such as schools. Future trials should include a longer term-follow-up at least at 12 months, in order to determine whether the intervention effects improve, stay the same or wear off over time. Funding: UKRIMedical Research Council.

Digital peer-to-peer support programme for informal caregivers of people living with motor neuron disease: study protocol for a multi-centre parallel group, single-blinded (outcome assessor) randomised controlled superiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Peer support is effective in improving psychological well-being of family caregivers of people with conditions such as dementia, cancer, and brain injury. However, there are limited data on effective psychological interventions for family caregivers of people living with motor neurone disease. Our objective is to evaluate the efficacy of a virtual peer support programme for improving caregiver psychological wellbeing and caregiving related outcomes. METHODS: We will conduct a multi-centre parallel group randomised controlled superiority trial. Using a multi-modal recruitment strategy, we will recruit informal caregivers from UK MND clinics, in-patient units, and hospices. We will randomise (1:1, stratified by gender) participants to either a 12-week virtual peer support programme or usual care comprising provision of online information resources publicly available via the MND Association website. Peer support programme elements will be delivered via a secure digital e-platform aTouchAway™ (Aetonix, Canada). Our target sample size is 160 (80 each arm). Our primary outcome is the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) assessed at 12 weeks (primary endpoint). Secondary outcomes that will also be assessed at 12 weeks include the Zarit Burden Interview, Pearlin Mastery Scale, Personal Gain Scale, Positive Affect Scale, and the Brief COPE. Outcome assessors will be blinded to allocation. Tertiary outcomes include perceived usability (1 item 9-point Likert scale) and acceptability (semi-structured qualitative interviews) of the peer support programme. Intervention fidelity measures will comprise frequency, type (text, audio, video), and duration (audio and video) of peer support contact downloaded from the aTouchAway AWS server. We will use a mixed-effects linear model to test the effect of the intervention on the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes will be analysed using linear regression. We have ethical approval (21/NW/0269) from the North-West Research Ethics Committee, UK. DISCUSSION: This single-blinded randomised controlled trial will determine the effect of a virtual peer support programme on caregiver psychological wellbeing and caregiver burden. This study will examine the impact of a virtual peer support intervention on quality-of-life measures in informal caregivers of individuals with MND living in the community. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04695210.

Brief Educational Workshops in Secondary Schools Trial (BESST): protocol for a school-based cluster randomised controlled trial of open-access psychological workshop programme for 16-18-year-olds.

Anxiety and depression are increasingly prevalent in adolescents, often causing daily distress and negative long-term outcomes. Despite the significant and growing burden, less than 25% of those with probable diagnosis of anxiety and depression are receiving help in England. Significant barriers to help-seeking exist in this population, with a scarcity of easily accessible, effective, and cost-effective interventions tailored specially for this age group. One intervention that has been shown to be feasible to deliver and with the promise of reducing stress in this age group is a school-based stress workshop programme for 16-18-year-olds (herein called DISCOVER). The next step is to rigorously assess the effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness, of the DISCOVER intervention in a fully powered cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT). If found to be clinically and cost-effective, DISCOVER could be scaled up as a service model UK-wide and have a meaningful impact on the mental health of adolescents across the country.Trial registration: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN90912799. Registered with ISRCTN 28 May 2020.

Transdiagnostic therapy for persistent physical symptoms: A mediation analysis of the PRINCE secondary trial.

The PRINCE secondary trial did not find any evidence that transdiagnostic cognitive behavioural therapy (TDT-CBT) plus standard medical care (SMC) was more efficacious than SMC for patients with Persistent Physical Symptoms (PPS) for the primary outcome Work and Social Adjustment Scale (WSAS) at final follow-up (52 weeks). There was a significant treatment effect for TDT-CBT plus CBT compared with SMC for two secondary outcomes: WSAS at the end of active treatment (20 weeks) and symptom severity (Patient Health Questionnaire, PHQ-15) at 52 weeks. To understand mechanisms that lead to effects of TDT-CBT plus SMC versus SMC we performed a planned secondary mediation analysis. We investigated whether TDT-CBT treatment effects on these two secondary outcomes at the end of the treatment could be explained by effects on variables that were targeted by TDT-CBT during the initial phase of treatment. We pre-specified mediator variables measured at mid-treatment (9 weeks). Reductions in catastrophising and symptom focusing were the strongest mediators of TDT-CBT treatment effects on WSAS at the end of treatment. Improvements in symptom focusing also mediated the effect of TDT-CBT on PHQ-15. Future developments of the TDT-CBT intervention could benefit from targeting these mediators.

REACH-ASD: a UK randomised controlled trial of a new post-diagnostic psycho-education and acceptance and commitment therapy programme against treatment-as-usual for improving the mental health and adjustment of caregivers of children recently diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder.

BACKGROUND: Autism is a neurodevelopmental disability affecting over 1% of UK children. The period following a child's autism diagnosis can present real challenges in adaptation for families. Twenty to 50% of caregivers show clinically significant levels of mental health need within the post-diagnostic period and on an ongoing basis. Best practice guidelines recommend timely post-diagnostic family support. Current provision is patchy, largely unevidenced, and a source of dissatisfaction for both families and professionals. There is a pressing need for an evidenced programme of post-diagnostic support focusing on caregiver mental health and adjustment, alongside autism psycho-education. This trial tests the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a new brief manualised psychosocial intervention designed to address this gap. METHODS: This is a multi-centre two-parallel-group single (researcher)-blinded randomised controlled trial of the Empower-Autism programme plus treatment-as-usual versus usual local post-diagnostic offer plus treatment-as-usual. Caregivers of children aged 2-15 years with a recent autism diagnosis will be recruited from North West England NHS or local authority centres. Randomisation is individually by child, with one "index" caregiver per child, stratified by centre, using 2:1 randomisation ratio to assist recruitment and timely intervention. Empower-Autism is a group-based, manualised, post-diagnostic programme that combines autism psycho-education and psychotherapeutic components based on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy to support caregiver mental health, stress management and adjustment to their child's diagnosis. The comparator is any usual local group-based post-diagnostic psycho-education offer. Receipt of services will be specified through health economic data. PRIMARY OUTCOME: caregiver mental health (General Health Questionnaire-30) at 52-week follow-up. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: key caregiver measures (wellbeing, self-efficacy, adjustment, autism knowledge) at 12-, 26- and 52-week follow-up and family and child outcomes (wellbeing and functioning) at 52-week endpoint. SAMPLE: N=380 (approximately 253 intervention/127 treatment-as-usual). Primary analysis will follow intention-to-treat principles using linear mixed models with random intercepts for group membership and repeated measures. Cost-effectiveness acceptability analyses will be over 52 weeks, with decision modelling to extrapolate to longer time periods. DISCUSSION: If effective, this new approach will fill a key gap in the provision of evidence-based care pathways for autistic children and their families. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 45412843 . Prospectively registered on 11 September 2019.

Combined social communication therapy at home and in education for young autistic children in England (PACT-G): a parallel, single-blind, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Autistic children can have difficulty generalising treatment effects beyond the immediate treatment context. Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy (PACT) has been successful when delivered in the clinic. Here we tested the Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy-Generalised (PACT-G) intervention combined between home and education settings for its overall effect and mechanistic transmission of effect across contexts. METHODS: In this parallel, single-blind, randomised, controlled trial, we recruited autistic children aged 2-11 years in urban or semi-urban areas in Manchester, Newcastle, and London, England. Children needed to meet core autism criteria on Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule-second edition (ADOS-2) and parent-rated Social Communication Questionnaire (SCQ-lifetime), and children older than 5 years were included if they had intentional communication but expressive language equivalent of age 4 years or younger. Eligible children were randomly assigned (1:1), using block randomisation (random block sizes of 2 and 4) and stratified for site, age (2-4 years vs 5-11 years), and gender, to either PACT-G plus treatment as usual or treatment as usual alone. Research assessors were masked to treatment allocation. The PACT-G intervention was delivered by a therapist in parallel to the child's parents at home and to learning-support assistants (LSA) at their place of education, using both in-person and remote sessions over a 6 month period, to optimise adult-child social interaction. Treatment as usual included any health support or intervention from education or local community services. The primary outcome was autism symptom severity using the ADOS-2, as measured by researchers, at 12 months versus baseline. Secondary outcomes were Brief Observation of Social Communication Change (BOSCC) and dyadic social interaction between child and adult across contexts, both at 12 months. Other secondary outcome measures were assessed using the following composites: language, anxiety, repetitive behaviour, adaptive behaviour, parental wellbeing, child health-related quality of life, and disruptive behaviour. Assessments were done at baseline, 7 months, and 12 months. We used an intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis of covariance for the efficacy outcome measures. Adverse events were assessed by researchers for all trial families at each contact and by therapists in the PACT-G group at each visit. This study is registered with the ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN 25378536. FINDINGS: Between Jan 18, 2017, and April 19, 2018, 555 children were referred and 249 were eligible, agreed to participate, and were randomly assigned to either PACT-G (n=122) or treatment as usual (n=127). One child in the PACT-G group withdrew and requested their data be removed from the study, giving an ITT population of 248 children. 51 (21%) of 248 children were female, 197 (79%) were male, 149 (60%) were White, and the mean age was 4·0 years (SD 0·6). The groups were well balanced for demographic and clinical characteristics. In the PACT-G group, parents of children received a median of 10 (IQR 8-12) home sessions and LSAs received a median of 8 (IQR 5-10) education sessions over 6 months. We found no treatment effect on the ADOS-2 primary outcome compared with treatment as usual (effect size 0·04 [95% CI -0·19 to 0·26]; p=0·74), or researcher-assessed BOSCC (0·03 [-0·25 to 0·31]), language composite (-0·03 [-0·15 to 0·10]), repetitive behaviour composite (0·00 [-0·35 to 0·35]), adaptive behaviour composite (0·01 [-0·15 to 0·18]), or child wellbeing (0·09 [-0·15 to 0·34]). PACT-G treatment improved synchronous response in both parent (0·50 [0·36 to 0·65]) and LSA (0·33 [0·16 to 0·50]), mediating increased child communication with parent (0·26 [0·12 to 0·40]) and LSA (0·20 [0·06 to 0·34]). Child dyadic communication change mediated outcome symptom alteration on BOSCC at home (indirect effect -0·78 [SE 0·34; 95% CI -1·44 to -0·11]; p=0·022) although not in education (indirect effect -0·67 [SE 0·37; 95% CI -1·40 to 0·06]; p=0·073); such an effect was not seen on ADOS-2. Treatment with PACT-G also improved the parental wellbeing composite (0·44 [0·08 to 0·79]) and the child disruptive behaviour composite in home and education (0·29 [0·01 to 0·57]). Adverse events on child behaviour and wellbeing were recorded in 13 (10%) of 127 children in the treatment as usual group (of whom four [31%] were girls) and 11 (9%) of 122 in the PACT-G group (of whom three [33%] were girls). One serious adverse event on parental mental health was recorded in the PACT-G group and was possibly study related. INTERPRETATION: Although we found no effect on the primary outcome compared with treatment as usual, adaptation of the 12-month PACT intervention into briefer multicomponent delivery across home and education preserved the positive proximal outcomes, although smaller in effect size, and the original pattern of treatment mediation seen in clinic-delivered therapy, as well as improving parental wellbeing and child disruptive behaviours across home and school. Reasons for this reduced efficacy might be the reduced dose of each component, the effect of remote delivery, and the challenges of the delivery contexts. Caution is needed in assuming that changing delivery methods and context will preserve an original intervention efficacy for autistic children. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research and Medical Research Council Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Award.

Open Dialogue compared to treatment as usual for adults experiencing a mental health crisis: Protocol for the ODDESSI multi-site cluster randomised controlled trial.

Background 'Open Dialogue' is a social network model of crisis and continuing mental healthcare which involves elements of service delivery such as immediate response and a style of therapeutic meeting called network meetings. Although there are indications from non-randomised studies that it may help people in their recovery from severe mental health crises and improve long-term outcomes, this has yet to be tested in a randomised controlled trial. Methods This paper outlines the protocol for a multi-site cluster-randomised control trial assessing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of Open Dialogue compared to treatment as usual (TAU) for individuals presenting in crisis to six mental health services in England. The primary outcome is time to relapse, with secondary outcomes including measures of recovery and service use. Participants will be followed-up for two years, with data collected from electronic medical records and researcher-led interviews. The analysis will compare outcomes between treatment groups as well as investigating potential mediators of effect: shared decision-making and social network quality and size. Carers of a subsample of participants will be asked about their experiences of shared decision-making, carer burden, and satisfaction. Discussion This trial will provide evidence of whether Open Dialogue services implemented in the English mental health system is an effective alternative to current care and may have important implications for the organization of community mental health services. Trial registration: retrospectively registered (108 participants recruited of 570 target) on 20/12/2019, ISRCTN52653325.

Solution Focused Brief Therapy in Post-Stroke Aphasia (SOFIA): feasibility and acceptability results of a feasibility randomised wait-list controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: The Solution Focused Brief Therapy in Post-Stroke Aphasia feasibility trial had four primary aims: to assess (1) acceptability of the intervention to people with aphasia, including severe aphasia, (2) feasibility of recruitment and retention, (3) acceptability of research procedures and outcome measures, and (4) feasibility of delivering the intervention by speech and language therapists. DESIGN: Two-group randomised controlled feasibility trial with wait-list design, blinded outcome assessors and nested qualitative research. SETTING: Participants identified via two community NHS Speech and Language Therapy London services and through community routes (eg, voluntary-sector stroke groups). PARTICIPANTS: People with aphasia at least 6 months post stroke. INTERVENTION: Solution-focused brief therapy, a psychological intervention, adapted to be linguistically accessible. Participants offered up to six sessions over 3 months, either immediately postrandomisation or after a delay of 6 months. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary endpoints related to feasibility and acceptability. Clinical outcomes were collected at baseline, 3 and 6 months postrandomisation, and at 9 months (wait-list group only). The candidate primary outcome measure was the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale. Participants and therapists also took part in in-depth interviews. RESULTS: Thirty-two participants were recruited, including 43.8% with severe aphasia. Acceptability endpoints: therapy was perceived as valuable and acceptable by both participants (n=30 interviews) and therapists (n=3 interviews); 93.8% of participants had ≥2 therapy sessions (90.6% had 6/6 sessions). Feasibility endpoints: recruitment target was reached within the prespecified 13-month recruitment window; 82.1% of eligible participants consented; 96.9% were followed up at 6 months; missing data <0.01%. All five prespecified feasibility progression criteria were met. CONCLUSION: The high retention and adherence rates, alongside the qualitative data, suggest the study design was feasible and therapy approach acceptable even to people with severe aphasia. These results indicate a definitive randomised controlled trial of the intervention would be feasible. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03245060.

SUpporting wellbeing through PEeR-Befriending (SUPERB) feasibility trial: fidelity of peer-befriending for people with aphasia.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate systematically the fidelity of a peer-befriending intervention for people with aphasia. DESIGN: SUpporting wellbeing through Peer-befriending (SUPERB) was a feasibility randomised controlled trial comparing usual care to usual care +peer-befriending. This paper reports on the fidelity of all intervention aspects (training and supervision of providers/befrienders; intervention visits) which was evaluated across all areas of the Behaviour Change Consortium framework. SETTING: Community. PARTICIPANTS: People with aphasia early poststroke and low levels of distress, randomised to the intervention arm of the trial (n=28); 10 peer-befrienders at least 1-year poststroke. INTERVENTION: Peer-befrienders were trained (4-6 hours); and received regular supervision (monthly group while actively befriending, and one-to-one as and when needed) in order to provide six 1-hour peer-befriending visits over 3 months. MAIN MEASURES: Metrics included number and length of training, supervision sessions and visits. All training and supervision sessions and one (of six) visits per pair were rated against fidelity checklists and evaluated for inter-rater and intrarater reliability (Gwets AC1 agreement coefficient). Per-cent adherence to protocol was evaluated. RESULTS: All peer-befrienders received 4-6 hours training over 2-3 days as intended. There were 25 group supervision sessions with a median number attended of 14 (IQR=8-18). Twenty-six participants agreed (92.8%) to the intervention and 21 (80.8%) received all six visits (median visit length 60 min). Adherence was high for training (91.7%-100%) and supervision (83%-100%) and moderate-to-high for befriending visits (66.7%-100%). Where calculable, inter-rater and intrarater reliability was high for training and supervision (Gwets AC1 >0.90) and moderate-to-high for intervention visits (Gwets AC1 0.44-1.0). CONCLUSION: Planning of fidelity processes at the outset of the trial and monitoring throughout was feasible and ensured good-to-high fidelity for this peer-befriending intervention. The results permit confidence in other findings from the SUPERB trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02947776.

Effects of SlowMo, a Blended Digital Therapy Targeting Reasoning, on Paranoia Among People With Psychosis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Persistent paranoia is common among patients with psychosis. Cognitive-behavioral therapy for psychosis can be effective. However, challenges in engagement and effectiveness remain. Objective: To investigate the effects on paranoia and mechanisms of action of SlowMo, a digitally supported reasoning intervention, plus usual care compared with usual care only. Design, Setting, and Participants: This parallel-arm, assessor-blinded, randomized clinical trial recruited participants at UK community health services from May 1, 2017, to May 14, 2019. Eligible participants consisted of a referral sample with schizophrenia-spectrum psychosis and distressing, persistent (≥3 months) paranoia. Interventions: Individuals were randomized 1:1 to SlowMo, consisting of 8 digitally supported face-to-face sessions and a mobile app, plus usual care (n = 181) and usual care only (n = 181). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was paranoia, measured by the Green et al Paranoid Thoughts Scale (GPTS) total score at 24 weeks. Secondary outcomes included GPTS total score at 12 weeks and GPTS Part A (reference) and Part B (persecutory) scores, the Psychotic Symptom Rating Scales (PSYRATS Delusion subscale), reasoning (belief flexibility, possibility of being mistaken [Maudsley Assessment of Delusions, rated 0%-100%]), and jumping to conclusions (Beads Task). Results: A total of 361 participants were included in intention-to-treat analysis, of whom 252 (69.8%) were male and 249 (69.0%) were White; the mean (SD) age was 42.6 (11.6) years. At 24 weeks, 332 participants (92.0%) provided primary outcome data. Of 181 participants in the SlowMo group, 145 (80.1%) completed therapy. SlowMo plus usual care was not associated with greater reductions than usual care in GPTS total score at 24 weeks (Cohen d, 0.20; 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.40; P = .06). There were significant effects on secondary paranoia outcomes at 12 weeks, including GPTS total score (Cohen d, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.09-0.51; P = .005), Part A score (Cohen d, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.06-0.39; P = .009), and Part B score (Cohen d, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.08-0.56; P = .009), and at 24 weeks, including Part B score (Cohen d, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.01-0.49; P = .04) but not Part A score (Cohen d, 0.12; 95% CI, -0.05 to 0.28; P = .18). Improvements were observed in an observer-rated measure of persecutory delusions (PSYRATS delusion) at 12 weeks (Cohen d, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.17-0.78; P = .002) and 24 weeks (Cohen d, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.20-0.80; P = .001) and belief flexibility at 12 weeks (Cohen d, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.09-0.49; P = .004) and 24 weeks (Cohen d, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.08-0.49; P = .005). There were no significant effects on jumping to conclusions. Improved belief flexibility and worry mediated paranoia change (range mediated, 36%-56%). Conclusions and Relevance: SlowMo did not demonstrate significant improvements in the primary measure of paranoia at 24 weeks; however, a beneficial effect of SlowMo on paranoia was indicated by the results on the primary measure at an earlier point and on observer-rated paranoia and self-reported persecution at 12 and 24 weeks. Further work to optimize SlowMo's effects is warranted. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN 32448671.

Supporting wellbeing through peer-befriending (SUPERB) for people with aphasia: A feasibility randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility and acceptability of peer-befriending, for people with aphasia. DESIGN: Single-blind, parallel-group feasibility randomised controlled trial comparing usual care to usual care + peer-befriending. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: People with aphasia post-stroke and low levels of distress, recruited from 5 NHS Hospitals and linked community services; their significant others; and 10 befrienders recruited from community. INTERVENTION: Six 1-hour peer-befriending visits over three months. MAIN MEASURES: Feasibility parameters included proportion eligible of those screened; proportion consented; missing data; consent and attrition rates. Acceptability was explored through qualitative interviews. Outcomes for participants and significant others were measured at baseline, 4- and 10-months; for peer-befrienders before training and after one/two cycles of befriending. RESULTS: Of 738 patients identified, 75 were eligible of 89 fully screened (84%), 62 consented (83% of eligible) and 56 randomised. Attrition was 16%. Adherence was high (93% attended ⩾2 sessions, 81% all six). The difference at 10 months on the GHQ-12 was 1.23 points on average lower/better in the intervention arm (95% CI 0.17, -2.63). There was an 88% decrease in the odds of GHQ-12 caseness (95% CI 0.01, 1.01). Fourty-eight significant others and 10 peer-befrienders took part. Procedures and outcome measures were acceptable. Serious adverse events were few (n = 10, none for significant others and peer-befrienders) and unrelated. CONCLUSIONS: SUPERB peer-befriending for people with aphasia post-stroke experiencing low levels of distress was feasible. There was preliminary evidence of benefit in terms of depression. Peer-befriending is a suitable intervention to explore further in a definitive trial.Clinical trial registration-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov Unique identifier: NCT02947776Subject terms: Translational research, mental health, rehabilitation, quality and outcomes, stroke.

Correction to: Integrated GP care for patients with persistent physical symptoms: feasibility cluster randomised trial.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.

BMC family practice integrated GP care for patients with persistent physical symptoms: feasibility cluster randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients continue to suffer from medically unexplained symptoms otherwise referred to as persistent physical symptoms (PPS). General practitioners (GPs) play a key role in the management of PPS and require further training. Patients are often frustrated with the care they receive. This study aims to assess the acceptability of an 'integrated GP care' approach which consists of offering self-help materials to patients with PPS and offering their GPs training on how to utilise cognitive behavioural skills within their consultations, as well as assessing the feasibility of conducting a future trial in primary care to evaluate its benefit. METHODS: A feasibility cluster randomised controlled trial was conducted in primary care, South London, UK. GP practices (clusters) were randomly allocated to 'integrated GP care plus treatment as usual' or 'treatment as usual'. Patients with PPS were recruited from participating GP practices before randomisation. Feasibility parameters, process variables and potential outcome measures were collected at pre-randomisation and at 12- and 24-weeks post-randomisation at cluster and individual participant level. RESULTS: Two thousand nine hundred seventy-eight patients were identified from 18 GP practices. Out of the 424 patients who responded with interest in the study, 164 fully met the eligibility criteria. One hundred sixty-one patients provided baseline data before cluster randomisation and therefore were able to participate in the study. Most feasibility parameters indicated that the intervention was acceptable and a future trial feasible. 50 GPs from 8 GP practices (randomised to intervention) attended the offer of training and provided positive feedback. Scores in GP knowledge and confidence increased post-training. Follow-up rate of patients at 24 weeks was 87%. However estimated effect sizes on potential clinical outcomes were small. CONCLUSIONS: It was feasible to identify and recruit patients with PPS. Retention rates of participants up to 24 weeks were high. A wide range of health services were used. The intervention was relatively low cost and low risk. This complex intervention should be further developed to improve patients'/GPs' utilisation of audio/visual and training resources before proceeding to a full trial evaluation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02444520  (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Correction to: Persistent physical symptoms reduction intervention: a system change and evaluation in secondary care (PRINCE secondary) - a CBT-based transdiagnostic approach: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.

Persistent physical symptoms reduction intervention: a system change and evaluation in secondary care (PRINCE secondary) - a CBT-based transdiagnostic approach: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Persistent physical symptoms (PPS), also known as medically unexplained symptoms (MUS), affect approximately 50% of patients in secondary care and are often associated with disability, psychological distress and increased health care costs. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) has demonstrated both short- and long-term efficacy with small to medium effect sizes for PPS, with larger treatment effects for specific PPS syndromes, including non-cardiac chest pain, irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). Research indicates that PPS conditions share similar cognitive and behavioural responses to symptoms, such as avoidance and unhelpful beliefs. This suggests that a transdiagnostic approach may be beneficial for patients with PPS. METHODS: A randomised controlled trial (RCT) will be conducted to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of a transdiagnostic CBT-based intervention for PPS. 322 participants with PPS will be recruited from secondary care clinics. Participants stratified by clinic and disability level will be randomised to CBT plus standard medical care (SMC) versus SMC alone. The intervention consists of 8 CBT sessions delivered by a qualified therapist over a period of 20 weeks. Outcomes will be assessed at 9, 20, 40- and 52-weeks post randomisation. Efficacy will be assessed by examining the difference between arms in the primary outcome Work and Social Adjustment Scale (WSAS) at 52 weeks after randomisation. Secondary outcomes will include mood, symptom severity and clinical global impression at 9, 20, 40 and 52 weeks. Cost-effectiveness will be evaluated by combining measures of health service use, informal care, loss of working hours and financial benefits at 52 weeks. DISCUSSION: This trial will provide a powered evaluation of the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of a transdiagnostic CBT approach versus SMC for patients with PPS. It will also provide valuable information about potential healthcare pathways for patients with PPS within the National Health Service (NHS). TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02426788. Registered 27 April 2015. Overall trial status: Ongoing; Recruitment status: No longer recruiting.

Persistent physical symptoms reduction intervention: a system change and evaluation (PRINCE)-integrated GP care for persistent physical symptoms: protocol for a feasibility and cluster randomised waiting list, controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Persistent physical symptoms (PPS), also known as medically unexplained symptoms are associated with profound physical disability, psychological distress and high healthcare costs. England's annual National Health Service costs of attempting to diagnose and treat PPS amounts to approximately £3 billion. Current treatment relies on a positive diagnosis, life-style advice and drug therapy. However, many patients continue to suffer from ongoing symptoms and general practitioners (GPs) are challenged to find effective treatments. Training GPs in basic cognitive behavioural skills and providing self-help materials to patients could be useful, but availability in primary care settings is limited. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A cluster randomised waiting list, controlled trial will be conducted to assess the feasibility of an integrated approach to care in general practice. Approximately 240 patients with PPS will be recruited from 8 to 12 GP practices in London. GP practices will be randomised to 'integrated GP care plus treatment as usual' or waiting list control. Integrated GP care plus treatment as usual will include GP training in cognitive behavioural skills, GP supervision and written and audio visual materials for both GPs and participants. The primary objectives will be assessment of trial and intervention feasibility. Secondary objectives will include estimating the intracluster correlation coefficient for potential outcome measures for cluster effects in a sample size calculation. Feasibility parameters and identification of suitable primary and secondary outcomes for future trial evaluations will be assessed prerandomisation and at 12 and 24 weeks' postrandomisation, using a mixed-methods approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was granted by the Camberwell St Giles Ethics Committee. Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. This trial will inform researchers, clinicians, patients and healthcare providers about the feasibility and potential cost-effectiveness of an integrated approach to managing PPS in primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02444520; Pre-results.