We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
We aimed to identify the common types of outcome trajectories for patients with psychosis who take up specialist psychological therapy for persecutory delusions. Knowing the different potential responses to therapy can inform expectations. Further, determining predictors of different outcomes may help in understanding who may benefit.
Methods
We analyzed delusion conviction data from 767 therapy sessions with 64 patients with persistent persecutory delusions (held with at least 60% conviction) who received a six-month psychological intervention (Feeling Safe) during a clinical trial. Latent class trajectory analysis was conducted to identify groups with distinct outcome profiles. The trajectories were validated against independent assessments, including a longer-term follow-up six months after the end of therapy. We also tested potential predictors of the trajectories.
Results
There were four outcome trajectories: (1) Very high delusion conviction/Little improvement (n = 14, 25%), (2) Very high delusion conviction/Large improvement (n = 9, 16%), (3) High delusion conviction/Moderate improvement (n = 17, 31%) and (4) High delusion conviction/Large improvement (n = 15, 27%). The groups did not differ in initial overall delusion severity. The trajectories were consistent with the independent assessments and sustained over time. Three factors predicted trajectories: persecutory delusion conviction, therapy expectations, and positive beliefs about other people.
Conclusions
There are variable responses to psychological therapy for persecutory delusions. Patients with very high delusion conviction can have excellent responses to therapy, though this may take a little longer to observe and such high conviction reduces the likelihood of positive responses. A trajectory approach requires testing in larger datasets but may prove highly informative.
Low self-confidence in patients with psychosis is common. This can lead to higher symptom severity, withdrawal from activities, and low psychological well-being. There are effective psychological techniques to improve positive self-beliefs but these are seldom provided in psychosis services. With young people with lived experience of psychosis we developed a scalable automated VR therapy to enhance positive-self beliefs.
Aims:
The aim was to conduct a proof of concept clinical test of whether the new VR self-confidence therapy (Phoenix) may increase positive self-beliefs and psychological well-being.
Method:
Twelve young patients with non-affective psychosis and with low levels of positive self-beliefs participated. Over 6 weeks, patients were provided with a stand-alone VR headset so that they could use Phoenix at home and were offered weekly psychologist meetings. The outcome measures were the Oxford Positive Self Scale (OxPos), Brief Core Schema Scale, and Warwick-Edinburgh Well-being Scale (WEMWBS). Satisfaction, adverse events and side-effects were assessed.
Results:
Eleven patients provided outcome data. There were very large end-of-treatment improvements in positive self-beliefs (OxPos mean difference = 32.3; 95% CI: 17.3, 47.3; Cohen’s d=3.0) and psychological well-being (WEMWBS mean difference = 11.2; 95% CI: 8.0, 14.3; Cohen’s d=1.5). Patients rated the quality of the VR therapy as: excellent (n=9), good (n=2), fair (n=0), poor (n=0). An average of 5.3 (SD=1.4) appointments were attended.
Conclusions:
Uptake of the VR intervention was high, satisfaction was high, and side-effects extremely few. There were promising indications of large improvements in positive self-beliefs and psychological well-being. A randomized controlled clinical evaluation is warranted.
Hoarding disorder (HD) can be understood through the cognitive behavioural model in the context of vulnerability factors (for example, personality traits, co-morbidities, traumatic life events) and beliefs about possessions (for example, identity, emotional attachment, memory, utility). Less is known about the strength of these hypothesised beliefs, or how they interact within the hoarding population, with researchers suggesting that specifying beliefs would improve treatment outcomes.
Aim:
The current study explored beliefs in HD, utilising Q-methodology to explore both categories of beliefs and the interactions between these. Moreover, Q-methodology allowed for comparison of the individuals endorsing specific categories of beliefs.
Method:
A comprehensive list of beliefs about possessions was developed. Thirty-two adults with clinically significant levels of HD completed a Q-sort task, alongside measures of proposed vulnerabilities, including co-morbidity, trauma and attachment style.
Results:
Q-factor analysis produced four profiles consisting of groups of participants who endorsed the same beliefs and had shared characteristics: (1) ‘Expression of identity’, (2) ‘Responsibility and morality’, (3) ‘Stability and predictability’, and (4) ‘Objects as emotional and meaningful beings’.
Discussion:
The profiles were distinguished by different categories of beliefs and co-morbid symptoms, suggesting that more targeted assessment tools and interventions would be beneficial to account for this heterogeneity within the clinical population. In particular, beliefs about identity and self-concept formed the largest profile, and beliefs about stability and predictability introduce a novel category of beliefs.
Obsessive–compulsive symptoms (OCS) are commonly associated with clozapine treatment but are frequently overlooked by clinicians despite their potential impact on patients' quality of life. In this study, we explored whether OCS severity impacted subjective wellbeing and general functioning, independently of depressive and psychotic symptoms.
Methods
We used anonymised electronic healthcare records from a large cohort of patients who were treated with clozapine and assessed annually for OCS, wellbeing, general functioning, and psychopathology using standardised scales as part of routine clinical practice. We used statistical mixed linear model techniques to evaluate the longitudinal influence of OCS severity on wellbeing and general functioning.
Results
A total of 184 patients were included, with 527 face-to-face assessments and 64.7% evaluated three or more times. Different linear mixed models demonstrated that OCS in patients treated with clozapine were associated with significantly worse wellbeing scores, independently of depression and psychotic symptoms, but OCS did not impair general functioning. Obsessional thinking and hoarding behaviour, but not compulsions, were significantly associated with the impact on wellbeing, which may be attributable to the ego-syntonic nature of the compulsions.
Conclusions
Given the frequent occurrence of OCS and their negative impact on wellbeing, we encourage clinicians to routinely assess and treat OCS in patients who are taking clozapine.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.