Patient's Experiences of a Cognitive Behaviour Therapy Informed Crisis Intervention for Psychosis Delivered in Inpatient Settings: A Qualitative Exploration.

Cognitive behaviour therapy for psychosis (CBTp) should be offered to patients receiving psychiatric inpatient care, yet very little is known about patients' perspectives on this. The aim of this study was to examine patients' experiences of a CBTp-informed intervention delivered in inpatient settings. We recruited 10 participants from the intervention arm of a randomised controlled trial examining the feasibility and acceptability of a CBTp-informed intervention for psychiatric inpatient settings. We undertook semistructured interviews examining their experiences of the intervention and analysed them using thematic analysis. The study was conducted in partnership with a coproduction group of key stakeholders (people with lived experience, family and carers, and clinicians). The intervention was found helpful by almost all participants, and all participants would recommend it to others in similar situations to themselves. The results demonstrated that participants valued the therapist's professionalism and emphasised the importance of the therapeutic relationship. Participants highlighted the importance of the therapy focusing on navigating admission and developing skills to manage the crisis experience so they could return to their normal lives. Participants described challenges to having psychological therapy in the acute crisis context including therapy interruptions and ongoing distressing experiences of psychosis. The study demonstrated the importance of prioritising the therapeutic relationship, that therapy was a valued process to navigate admission and discharge, but that some environmental and patient-level challenges were present. Further research is needed to explore inpatients' experiences of psychological interventions in this setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN trial registry: ISRCTN59055607.

"I'd rather wait and see what's around the corner": A multi-perspective qualitative study of treatment escalation planning in frailty.

INTRODUCTION: People living with frailty risk adverse outcomes following even minor illnesses. Admission to hospital or the intensive care unit is associated with potentially burdensome interventions and poor outcomes. Decision-making during an emergency is fraught with complexity and potential for conflict between patients, carers and clinicians. Advance care planning is a process of shared decision-making which aims to ensure patients are treated in line with their wishes. However, planning for future care is challenging and those living with frailty are rarely given the opportunity to discuss their preferences. The aim of the ProsPECT (Prospective Planning for Escalation of Care and Treatment) study was to explore perspectives on planning for treatment escalation in the context of frailty. We spoke to people living with frailty, their carers and clinicians across primary and secondary care. METHODS: In-depth online or telephone interviews and online focus groups. The topic guide explored frailty, acute decision-making and planning for the future. Data were thematically analysed using the Framework Method. Preliminary findings were presented to a sample of study participants for feedback in two online workshops. RESULTS: We spoke to 44 participants (9 patients, 11 carers and 24 clinicians). Four main themes were identified: frailty is absent from treatment escalation discussions, planning for an uncertain future, escalation in an acute crisis is 'the path of least resistance', and approaches to facilitating treatment escalation planning in frailty. CONCLUSION: Barriers to treatment escalation planning include a lack of shared understanding of frailty and uncertainty about the future. Emergency decision-making is focussed on survival or risk aversion and patient preferences are rarely considered. To improve planning discussions, we recommend frailty training for non-specialist clinicians, multi-disciplinary support, collaborative working between patients, carers and clinicians as well as broader public engagement.