Eye-movement desensitisation and reprocessing therapy (EMDR) to prevent transition to psychosis in people with an at-risk mental state (ARMS): mixed method feasibility study.

IF 3.9 3区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
BJPsych Open Pub Date : 2024-05-09 DOI:10.1192/bjo.2024.57
Daniela Strelchuk, Nicola Wiles, Katrina Turner, Catherine Derrick, David Martin, Jonathan Davies, Stan Zammit
{"title":"Eye-movement desensitisation and reprocessing therapy (EMDR) to prevent transition to psychosis in people with an at-risk mental state (ARMS): mixed method feasibility study.","authors":"Daniela Strelchuk, Nicola Wiles, Katrina Turner, Catherine Derrick, David Martin, Jonathan Davies, Stan Zammit","doi":"10.1192/bjo.2024.57","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Trauma plays an important role in the development of psychosis, but no studies have investigated whether a trauma-focused therapy could prevent psychosis.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>This study aimed to establish whether it would be feasible to conduct a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) to prevent psychosis in people with an at-risk mental state (ARMS), using eye-movement desensitisation and reprocessing therapy (EMDR).</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This started as a mixed-method randomised study comparing EMDR to treatment as usual but, as a result of low participant recruitment, was changed to a single-arm feasibility study. The proposed primary outcome for an RCT was transition to psychosis at 12-month follow-up. Data on secondary outcomes were also collected. Qualitative interviews were conducted with patients and therapists.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fourteen participants were recruited from the Early Intervention teams. Most people who expressed an interest in taking part attended an assessment to determine eligibility. All those eligible consented to take part. A total of 64% (7 of 11) of participants who were offered EMDR were followed up at 12 months. Of the 11 participants offered EMDR, one (11%, 95% CI: 0.2%, 48%) transitioned to psychosis. Nine patients and three therapists were interviewed. Participants who completed therapy (<i>n</i> = 4; mean 10.5 sessions) found EMDR helpful, but those who discontinued (<i>n</i> = 6; mean 5.2 sessions) said it had not benefitted them overall. Therapists said EMDR could be effective, although not for all patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Future studies recruiting people with an ARMS to an RCT may need to extend recruitment beyond Early Intervention teams. Although some individuals found EMDR helpful, reasons for discontinuing need to be addressed in future studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":9038,"journal":{"name":"BJPsych Open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11094432/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJPsych Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1192/bjo.2024.57","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Trauma plays an important role in the development of psychosis, but no studies have investigated whether a trauma-focused therapy could prevent psychosis.

Aims: This study aimed to establish whether it would be feasible to conduct a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) to prevent psychosis in people with an at-risk mental state (ARMS), using eye-movement desensitisation and reprocessing therapy (EMDR).

Method: This started as a mixed-method randomised study comparing EMDR to treatment as usual but, as a result of low participant recruitment, was changed to a single-arm feasibility study. The proposed primary outcome for an RCT was transition to psychosis at 12-month follow-up. Data on secondary outcomes were also collected. Qualitative interviews were conducted with patients and therapists.

Results: Fourteen participants were recruited from the Early Intervention teams. Most people who expressed an interest in taking part attended an assessment to determine eligibility. All those eligible consented to take part. A total of 64% (7 of 11) of participants who were offered EMDR were followed up at 12 months. Of the 11 participants offered EMDR, one (11%, 95% CI: 0.2%, 48%) transitioned to psychosis. Nine patients and three therapists were interviewed. Participants who completed therapy (n = 4; mean 10.5 sessions) found EMDR helpful, but those who discontinued (n = 6; mean 5.2 sessions) said it had not benefitted them overall. Therapists said EMDR could be effective, although not for all patients.

Conclusions: Future studies recruiting people with an ARMS to an RCT may need to extend recruitment beyond Early Intervention teams. Although some individuals found EMDR helpful, reasons for discontinuing need to be addressed in future studies.

眼动脱敏和再处理疗法(EMDR)用于预防高危精神状态(ARMS)患者转为精神病:混合方法可行性研究。
背景:目的:本研究旨在确定采用眼动脱敏和再处理疗法(EMDR)对高危精神状态(ARMS)患者进行多中心随机对照试验(RCT)以预防精神病是否可行:这项研究最初是一项混合方法随机研究,将EMDR与常规治疗进行比较,但由于参与者招募人数较少,因此改为单臂可行性研究。拟议的RCT主要结果是随访12个月后转为精神病。此外,还收集了次要结果的数据。对患者和治疗师进行了定性访谈:从早期干预小组招募了 14 名参与者。大多数表示有兴趣参加的人都参加了评估,以确定是否符合条件。所有符合条件的人都同意参加。在接受EMDR治疗的参与者中,共有64%(11人中有7人)在12个月后接受了随访。在提供EMDR的11名参与者中,有一人(11%,95% CI:0.2%,48%)转为精神病患者。九名患者和三名治疗师接受了访谈。完成治疗的参与者(人数=4;平均10.5次治疗)认为EMDR很有帮助,但中止治疗的参与者(人数=6;平均5.2次治疗)则表示EMDR总体上并未使他们受益。治疗师表示,EMDR可能有效,但并非对所有患者都有效:未来的研究可能需要将招募ARMS患者参加RCT的范围扩大到早期干预团队以外。尽管有些人认为EMDR对他们有帮助,但在未来的研究中需要解决他们中断治疗的原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BJPsych Open
BJPsych Open Medicine-Psychiatry and Mental Health
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
3.70%
发文量
610
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Announcing the launch of BJPsych Open, an exciting new open access online journal for the publication of all methodologically sound research in all fields of psychiatry and disciplines related to mental health. BJPsych Open will maintain the highest scientific, peer review, and ethical standards of the BJPsych, ensure rapid publication for authors whilst sharing research with no cost to the reader in the spirit of maximising dissemination and public engagement. Cascade submission from BJPsych to BJPsych Open is a new option for authors whose first priority is rapid online publication with the prestigious BJPsych brand. Authors will also retain copyright to their works under a creative commons license.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信