Subjective cognitive functioning, depressive symptoms, and objective cognitive functioning in people with treatment-resistant psychosis.

Introduction: Relationships between subjective cognitive functioning (SCF), objective cognitive functioning (OCF), and depressive symptoms are poorly understood in treatment-resistant psychosis (TRP). This study (a) compares SCF in TRP using positively and negatively worded scales, (b) assess these scales' accuracy, and (c) explores the association between these scales and depressive symptoms. We hypothesised that both SCF scales would be highly correlated, minimally associated with OCF, and similarly associated with depressive symptoms. Methods: Archival clinical data from 52 TRP inpatients was utilised. OCF composite scores were derived from a broad neuropsychological battery. SCF was assessed using the norm-referenced PROMIS 2.0 Cognitive Abilities (positively worded) and Concerns (negatively worded) subscales. A depressive symptom score was derived from the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale. Results: SCF ratings were higher in patients than OCF. There was a small but significant correlation between PROMIS subscales (r = .30). Neither PROMIS subscale was associated with OCF (r = -.11, r = .01). Depressive symptoms were correlated with the positively (r = -.29) but not negatively worded scale (r = -.13). Conclusion: Individuals with TRP inaccurately rate their cognitive functioning and tend to overestimate their ability. Positively and negatively worded SCF scales associate variably with depressive symptoms, indicating they may not be used interchangeably in TRP.

Evaluation of health care providers' use of the 'Exercise and Depression Toolkit': a case study.

BACKGROUND: Exercise is now recommended as a primary treatment for mild-moderate depression in Canada. The 'Exercise and Depression Toolkit' was developed to help health care providers (HCP) integrate these treatment guidelines into practice. The purpose of this study was to evaluate acceptability and perceived effectiveness of the toolkit in practice by HCPs working with individuals with depression. METHODS: A case study design was utilized. The toolkit was given to 6 HCPs to use in practice for 4 weeks. Pre- and post-intervention phone interviews were conducted, and weekly logs were provided to track use and satisfaction of interactions with individuals with depression when using the toolkit. The study was conceptually guided by a hybrid theoretical approach using the Diffusion of Innovation Theory and the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. RESULTS: All HCPs used the toolkit at least once. Participants viewed their interactions when using the toolkit to be successful (considering individuals' receptiveness, its usefulness and general satisfaction.) The average success score for all participants was 5.5/7. HCPs found the toolkit to be acceptable. All participants (n = 6) viewed the toolkit as having relative advantage in helping them to discuss exercise with individuals with depression, and as relatively simple and easy to use (not complex) and adaptable to their practice needs (having trialability). Participants liked the toolkit and had mostly positive things to say about it. Participants had mixed feelings about whether changes in the people they worked with (such as mood and activity levels) could be observed (observability) and whether the toolkit changed their belief in their ability to recommend or discuss exercise (self-efficacy). Recommended dissemination strategies were adopted in promoting the toolkit. CONCLUSIONS: Future work should address observability and the ability for health care providers to see other providers using it, as well as effectiveness considering outcomes for people with depression such as mood and activity changes. The results of this initial evaluation seem promising for uptake and future adoption of the toolkit by health care providers working with adults with depression in Canada.