Based on an efficacious face-to-face theory-driven psychological therapy for persecutory delusions in the context of psychosis, we set out to develop a scalable guided 6-month online program. The aim was an intervention that patients can easily access and use, produces large clinical effects, and can be supported by a range of mental health professionals in less contact time than face-to-face therapy. We report here the proof-of-concept testing. At least moderate-sized clinical effects were required to progress to a randomized controlled trial (RCT).

In the 6-month Feeling Safer online program, a certified medical device, patients complete a brief assessment and then are provided with up to 10 modules that match their difficulties. Regular remote meetings with a mental health professional also take place. These may be supplemented by in-person visits. A pre- to post-treatment cohort trial was conducted with 14 patients with persistent persecutory delusions. The primary outcome was the Psychotic Symptoms Rating Scale (PSYRATS)-Delusions.

Satisfaction and usability ratings of the program were high. Very large reductions in persecutory delusions were observed (PSYRATS mean reduction = 7.1, 95% C.I. = 3.4, 10.8, n = 13, Cohen’s d = 3.0). There were large improvements in paranoia, anxiety, depression, agoraphobic distress, psychological wellbeing, meaningful activity, personal recovery, recovering quality of life, and moderate improvements in insomnia, agoraphobic avoidance, and quality of life.

The clinical effects associated with Feeling Safer were very high, comparable to those seen in the evaluations of the face-to-face therapy, and enable progression to an RCT.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Automated virtual reality therapies are being developed to increase access to psychological interventions. We assessed the experience with one such therapy of patients diagnosed with psychosis, including satisfaction, side effects, and positive experiences of access to the technology. We tested whether side effects affected therapy.

In a clinical trial 122 patients diagnosed with psychosis completed baseline measures of psychiatric symptoms, received gameChange VR therapy, and then completed a satisfaction questionnaire, the Oxford-VR Side Effects Checklist, and outcome measures.

79 (65.8%) patients were very satisfied with VR therapy, 37 (30.8%) were mostly satisfied, 3 (2.5%) were indifferent/mildly dissatisfied, and 1 (0.8%) person was quite dissatisfied. The most common side effects were: difficulties concentrating because of thinking about what might be happening in the room (n = 17, 14.2%); lasting headache (n = 10, 8.3%); and the headset causing feelings of panic (n = 9, 7.4%). Side effects formed three factors: difficulties concentrating when wearing a headset, feelings of panic using VR, and worries following VR. The occurrence of side effects was not associated with number of VR sessions, therapy outcomes, or psychiatric symptoms. Difficulties concentrating in VR were associated with slightly lower satisfaction. VR therapy provision and engagement made patients feel: proud (n = 99, 81.8%); valued (n = 97, 80.2%); and optimistic (n = 96, 79.3%).

Patients with psychosis were generally very positive towards the VR therapy, valued having the opportunity to try the technology, and experienced few adverse effects. Side effects did not significantly impact VR therapy. Patient experience of VR is likely to facilitate widespread adoption.

Agoraphobic avoidance of everyday situations is a common feature in many mental health disorders. Avoidance can be due to a variety of fears, including concerns about negative social evaluation, panicking, and harm from others. The result is inactivity and isolation. Behavioural avoidance tasks (BATs) provide an objective assessment of avoidance and in situ anxiety but are challenging to administer and lack standardisation. Our aim was to draw on the principles of BATs to develop a self-report measure of agoraphobia symptoms.

The scale was developed with 194 patients with agoraphobia in the context of psychosis, 427 individuals in the general population with high levels of agoraphobia, and 1094 individuals with low levels of agoraphobia. Factor analysis, item response theory, and receiver operating characteristic analyses were used. Validity was assessed against a BAT, actigraphy data, and an existing agoraphobia measure. Test–retest reliability was assessed with 264 participants.

An eight-item questionnaire with avoidance and distress response scales was developed. The avoidance and distress scales each had an excellent model fit and reliably assessed agoraphobic symptoms across the severity spectrum. All items were highly discriminative (avoidance: a = 1.24–5.43; distress: a = 1.60–5.48), indicating that small increases in agoraphobic symptoms led to a high probability of item endorsement. The scale demonstrated good internal reliability, test–retest reliability, and validity.

The Oxford Agoraphobic Avoidance Scale has excellent psychometric properties. Clinical cut-offs and score ranges are provided. This precise assessment tool may help focus attention on the clinically important problem of agoraphobic avoidance.

Around two-thirds of patients with auditory hallucinations experience derogatory and threatening voices (DTVs). Understandably, when these voices are believed then common consequences can be depression, anxiety and suicidal ideation. There is a need for treatment targeted at promoting distance from such voice content. The first step in this treatment development is to understand why patients listen to and believe voices that are appraised as malevolent.

To learn from patients their reasons for listening to and believing DTVs.

Theoretical sampling was used to recruit 15 participants with non-affective psychosis from NHS services who heard daily DTVs. Data were obtained by semi-structured interviews and analysed using grounded theory.

Six higher-order categories for why patients listen and/or believe voices were theorised. These were: (i) to understand the voices (e.g. what is their motive?); (ii) to be alert to the threat (e.g. prepared for what might happen); (iii) a normal instinct to rely on sensory information; (iv) the voices can be of people they know; (v) the DTVs use strategies (e.g. repetition) to capture attention; and (vi) patients feel so worn down it is hard to resist the voice experience (e.g. too mentally defeated to dismiss comments). In total, 21 reasons were identified, with all participants endorsing multiple reasons.

The study generated a wide range of reasons why patients listen to and believe DTVs. Awareness of these reasons can help clinicians understand the patient experience and also identify targets in psychological intervention.