Recruiting under-represented populations into psychiatric research: Results from the help for hoarding study.

This study compares the effectiveness of approaches used to recruit a diverse sample for a randomized clinical trial for Hoarding Disorder (HD) in the San Francisco Bay Area. Of the 632 individuals who inquired about the study, 313 were randomized and 231 completed treatment. Most participants heard about the study via flyering (N = 161), followed by advocacy groups (N = 113), word of mouth (N = 84), health care professionals (N = 78), online (N = 68), and media (N = 11). However, those that heard about the study via advertising methods, such as flyers, were less likely to complete the study, p = .01, while those recruited via advocacy groups were most likely to be randomized, p = .03. No source proved more effective in recruiting underrepresented groups such as men, p = .60; non-whites, p = .49; or Hispanics, p = .97. Advertising recruited the youngest individuals, p < 0.001, and word of mouth was most likely to recruit unemployed, disabled, or retired individuals, p = .01. Thus, results suggest an ongoing multimodal approach is likely to be most effective in both soliciting and retaining a diverse sample. Future studies should compare recruitment methods across greater geographical regions too, as well as in terms of financial and human costs.

Randomised clinical trial of community-based peer-led and psychologist-led group treatment for hoarding disorder.

BACKGROUND: Treatment for hoarding disorder is typically performed by mental health professionals, potentially limiting access to care in underserved areas. AIMS: We aimed to conduct a non-inferiority trial of group peer-facilitated therapy (G-PFT) and group psychologist-led cognitive-behavioural therapy (G-CBT). METHOD: We randomised 323 adults with hording disorder 15 weeks of G-PFT or 16 weeks of G-CBT and assessed at baseline, post-treatment and longitudinally (≥3 months post-treatment: mean 14.4 months, range 3-25). Predictors of treatment response were examined. RESULTS: G-PFT (effect size 1.20) was as effective as G-CBT (effect size 1.21; between-group difference 1.82 points, t = -1.71, d.f. = 245, P = 0.04). More homework completion and ongoing help from family and friends resulted in lower severity scores at longitudinal follow-up (t = 2.79, d.f. = 175, P = 0.006; t = 2.89, d.f. = 175, P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Peer-led groups were as effective as psychologist-led groups, providing a novel treatment avenue for individuals without access to mental health professionals. DECLARATION OF INTEREST: C.A.M. has received grant funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and travel reimbursement and speakers' honoraria from the Tourette Association of America (TAA), as well as honoraria and travel reimbursement from the NIH for serving as an NIH Study Section reviewer. K.D. receives research support from the NIH and honoraria and travel reimbursement from the NIH for serving as an NIH Study Section reviewer. R.S.M. receives research support from the National Institute of Mental Health, National Institute of Aging, the Hillblom Foundation, Janssen Pharmaceuticals (research grant) and the Alzheimer's Association. R.S.M. has also received travel support from the National Institute of Mental Health for Workshop participation. J.Y.T. receives research support from the NIH, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute and the California Tobacco Related Research Program, and honoraria and travel reimbursement from the NIH for serving as an NIH Study Section reviewer. All other authors report no conflicts of interest.

Treating Hoarding Disorder in a real-world setting: Results from the Mental Health Association of San Francisco.

Hoarding Disorder (HD) is associated with substantial distress, impairment, and individual and societal costs. Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) tailored to HD is the best-studied form of treatment and can be led by mental health professionals or by non-professionals (peers) with specific training. No previous study has directly compared outcomes for therapist-led and peer-led groups, and none have examined the effectiveness of these groups in a real-world setting. We used retrospective data to compare psychologist-led CBT groups (G-CBT) to groups led by peer facilitators using the Buried in Treasures workbooks (G-BiT) in individuals who sought treatment for HD from the Mental Health Association of San Francisco. The primary outcome was change in Hoarding Severity Scale scores. Approximate costs per participant were also examined. Both G-CBT and G-BiT showed improvement consistent with previous reports (22% improvement overall). After controlling for baseline group characteristics, there were no significant differences in outcomes between G-CBT and G-BiT. For G-CBT, where additional outcome data were available, functional impairment and severity of hoarding symptoms improved to a similar degree as compared to previous G-CBT studies, while hoarding-related cognition improved to a lesser degree (also consistent with previous studies). G-BiT cost approximately $100 less per participant than did G-CBT.