An oral health intervention for people with serious mental illness (Three Shires Early Intervention Dental Trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Oral health is an important part of general physical health and is essential for self-esteem, self-confidence and overall quality of life. There is a well-established link between mental illness and poor oral health. Oral health problems are not generally well recognized by mental health professionals and many patients experience barriers to treatment.Methods/design
This is the protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomised trial that has been designed to fit within standard care. Dental awareness training for care co-ordinators plus a dental checklist for service users in addition to standard care will be compared with standard care alone for people with mental illness. The checklist consists of questions about service users' current oral health routine and condition. Ten Early Intervention in Psychosis (EIP) teams in Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire and Lincolnshire will be cluster randomised (five to intervention and five to standard care) in blocks accounting for location and size of caseload. The oral health of the service users will be monitored for one year after randomisation.Trial registration
Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN63382258.
SUBMITTER: Jones HF
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3669616 | biostudies-literature | 2013 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
An oral health intervention for people with serious mental illness (Three Shires Early Intervention Dental Trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.
Jones Hannah F HF Adams Clive E CE Clifton Andrew A Simpson Jayne J Tosh Graeme G Liddle Peter F PF Callaghan Patrick P Yang Min M Guo Boliang B Furtado Vivek V
Trials 20130529
<h4>Background</h4>Oral health is an important part of general physical health and is essential for self-esteem, self-confidence and overall quality of life. There is a well-established link between mental illness and poor oral health. Oral health problems are not generally well recognized by mental health professionals and many patients experience barriers to treatment.<h4>Methods/design</h4>This is the protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomised trial that has been designed to fit within stand ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Psychosocial interventions for serious mental illness are resource intensive and poorly accessible. Brief interventions (eg, single session) that are augmented by follow-on automated mobile health intervention may expand treatment access. This was a randomized single-blind controlled trial with 255 individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. Participants were randomized to one of three conditions: CBT2go, which combined one individual session of cognitive behavioral therapy with automated thought challenging/adaptive behavior delivered through mobile devices; Self-Monitoring (SM), which combined single-session illness psychoeducation with self-monitoring of symptoms; and treatment-as-usual (TAU). Participants were assessed at baseline, 6 weeks (midpoint), 12 weeks (posttreatment), and 24 weeks (follow-up) with our primary outcome global psychopathology (Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale-expanded version [BPRS-24]), and secondary outcomes community functioning (Specific Level of Function; SLOF) and defeatist performance beliefs (DPBs). We also collected data on adverse events. Outcome analyses on the primary outcome, BPRS Total score, indicated a significant time (0-24 wk) by group interaction with significant but modest improvement comparing two active conditions (CBT2go and SM) relative to TAU. Effects of CBT2go were not different from SM. There was a significant time × group interaction with better SLOF scores in CBT2go across 24 weeks, but not in SM. There were no time-by-group effects on DPBs. DPBs decreased in the CBT2go condition but not in SM. These results indicated that single intervention augmented by mobile intervention was feasible and associated with small yet sustained effects on global psychopathology and, when inclusive of CBT, community function compared with usual care.
| S-EPMC6581143 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCardiovascular (CV) disease is the leading cause of death for people with serious mental illness (SMI), but clinicians are often slow to address this risk.Methods/design78 Midwestern primary care clinics were randomized to receive or not receive access to a clinical decision support (CDS) tool. Between March 2016 and September 2018, primary care clinicians (PCPs) received CDS alerts during visits with adult patients with SMI who met minimal inclusion criteria and had at least one CV risk factor not at goal. The PCP CDS included a summary of six modifiable CV risk factors and patient-specific treatment recommendations. Psychiatrists received CDS alerts during their next visit with an eligible patient with SMI that alerted them to an elevated body mass index or recent weight gain and the presence of an obesogenic SMI medication. Study outcomes include total modifiable CV risk, six modifiable CV risk factors, and use of obesogenic SMI medications.DiscussionThis cluster-randomized pragmatic trial allowed PCPs and psychiatrists the opportunity to improve CV risk in a timely manner for patients with SMI. Effectiveness will be assessed using an intent-to-treat analysis, and outcomes will be assessed largely through electronic health record data harvested by the CDS tool itself. In total, 10,347 patients with SMI had an index primary care visit in a randomized clinic, and 8937 patients had at least one follow-up visit. Analyses are ongoing, and trial results are expected in mid-2020.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02451670.
| S-EPMC7263956 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPeople with serious mental illness (SMI) have significant unmet mental health needs. Development and testing of digital interventions that can alleviate the suffering of people with SMI is a public health priority.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to conduct a fully remote randomized waitlist-controlled trial of CORE, a smartphone intervention that comprises daily exercises designed to promote reassessment of dysfunctional beliefs in multiple domains.MethodsIndividuals were recruited via the web using Google and Facebook advertisements. Enrolled participants were randomized into either active intervention or waitlist control groups. Participants completed the Beck Depression Inventory-Second Edition (BDI-II), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), Hamilton Program for Schizophrenia Voices, Green Paranoid Thought Scale, Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS), Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES), Friendship Scale, and Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) at baseline (T1), 30-day (T2), and 60-day (T3) assessment points. Participants in the active group used CORE from T1 to T2, and participants in the waitlist group used CORE from T2 to T3. Both groups completed usability and accessibility measures after they concluded their intervention periods.ResultsOverall, 315 individuals from 45 states participated in this study. The sample comprised individuals with self-reported bipolar disorder (111/315, 35.2%), major depressive disorder (136/315, 43.2%), and schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder (68/315, 21.6%) who displayed moderate to severe symptoms and disability levels at baseline. Participants rated CORE as highly usable and acceptable. Intent-to-treat analyses showed significant treatment×time interactions for the BDI-II (F1,313=13.38; P<.001), GAD-7 (F1,313=5.87; P=.01), RAS (F1,313=23.42; P<.001), RSES (F1,313=19.28; P<.001), and SDS (F1,313=10.73; P=.001). Large effects were observed for the BDI-II (d=0.58), RAS (d=0.61), and RSES (d=0.64); a moderate effect size was observed for the SDS (d=0.44), and a small effect size was observed for the GAD-7 (d=0.20). Similar changes in outcome measures were later observed in the waitlist control group participants following crossover after they received CORE (T2 to T3). Approximately 41.5% (64/154) of participants in the active group and 60.2% (97/161) of participants in the waitlist group were retained at T2, and 33.1% (51/154) of participants in the active group and 40.3% (65/161) of participants in the waitlist group were retained at T3.ConclusionsWe successfully recruited, screened, randomized, treated, and assessed a geographically dispersed sample of participants with SMI entirely via the web, demonstrating that fully remote clinical trials are feasible in this population; however, study retention remains challenging. CORE showed promise as a usable, acceptable, and effective tool for reducing the severity of psychiatric symptoms and disability while improving recovery and self-esteem. Rapid adoption and real-world dissemination of evidence-based mobile health interventions such as CORE are needed if we are to shorten the science-to-service gap and address the significant unmet mental health needs of people with SMI during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04068467; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04068467.
| S-EPMC8663659 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveGiven the high prevalence of obesity and diabetes in patients with serious mental illness (SMI) and the lack of evidence on the effects of weight loss programs in SMI patients with diabetes, we evaluated the effectiveness of a behavioral weight loss intervention among SMI participants with and without diabetes.Research design and methodsUsing data from ACHIEVE, a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effects of a behavioral weight loss intervention among overweight/obese people with SMI, we assessed and compared weight change from baseline to 18 months in participants with and without diabetes using a longitudinal mixed-effects model.ResultsOf the 291 trial participants, 82 (28.2%) participants had diabetes (34 and 48 in intervention and control groups, respectively) at baseline. Participants with diabetes were more likely to be taking antipsychotics (31.7% vs. 18.7%, P = 0.02). At 18 months, participants in the control group with diabetes lost 1.2 lb (0.6%) of body weight compared with 0.8 lb (0.7%) among those without diabetes. In the intervention group, participants with diabetes lost 13.7 lb (6.6%) of their initial body weight compared with 5.4 lb (2.9%) for those without diabetes. Corresponding net effects (intervention minus control) were 4.6 lb (2.2%) and 12.5 lb (6.0%) net weight reduction over 18 months in the no diabetes and the diabetes subgroups, respectively. However, the between-group difference in intervention effects was statistically nonsignificant (absolute weight change: P-interaction = 0.08; % weight change: P-interaction = 0.10).ConclusionsA behavioral weight loss intervention is effective among overweight and obese individuals with SMI regardless of their diabetes status.
| S-EPMC6489111 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPeople with a serious mental illness are more likely to smoke more and to be more dependent smokers than the general population. This may be due to a wide range of factors that could include a common aetiology to both smoking and the illness, self medication, smoking to alleviate adverse effects of medications, boredom in the existing environment, or a combination of these factors. It is important to undertake this review to facilitate improvements in both the health and safety of people with serious mental illness who smoke, and to reduce the overall burden of costs (both financial and health) to the smoker and, eventually, to the taxpayer.ObjectivesTo review the effects of smoking cessation advice for people with serious mental illness.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Specialized Trials Register up to 2 April 2015, which is based on regular searches of CENTRAL, BIOSIS, PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and trial registries. We also undertook unsystematic searches of a sample of the component databases (BNI, CINHAL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO), up to 2 April 2015, and searched references of all identified studiesSelection criteriaWe planned to include all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that focussed on smoking cessation advice versus standard care or comparing smoking cessation advice with other more focussed methods of delivering care or information.Data collection and analysisThe review authors (PK, AC, and DB) independently screened search results but did not identify any trials that fulfilled the inclusion criteria of this review.Main resultsWe did not identify any RCTs that evaluated advice regarding smoking cessation for people with serious mental illness. The excluded studies illustrate that randomisation of packages of care relevant to smokers with serious mental illness is possible.Authors' conclusionsPeople with serious mental illness are more likely to smoke than the general population. Yet we could not find any high quality evidence to guide the smoking cessation advice healthcare professionals pass onto service users. This is an area where trials are possible and needed.
| S-EPMC6513396 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSerious mental illness (SMI, including schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, and bipolar disorder) is associated with worse general health. However, admissions to general hospitals have received little investigation. We sought to delineate frequencies of and causes for non-psychiatric hospital admissions in SMI and compare with the general population in the same area.MethodsRecords of 18 380 individuals with SMI aged ⩾20 years in southeast London were linked to hospitalisation data. Age- and gender-standardised admission ratios (SARs) were calculated by primary discharge diagnoses in the 10th edition of the World Health Organization International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) codes, referencing geographic catchment data.ResultsCommonest discharge diagnosis categories in the SMI cohort were urinary conditions, digestive conditions, unclassified symptoms, neoplasms, and respiratory conditions. SARs were raised for most major categories, except neoplasms for a significantly lower risk. Hospitalisation risks were specifically higher for poisoning and external causes, injury, endocrine/metabolic conditions, haematological, neurological, dermatological, infectious and non-specific ('Z-code') causes. The five commonest specific ICD-10 diagnoses at discharge were 'chronic renal failure' (N18), a non-specific code (Z04), 'dental caries' (K02), 'other disorders of the urinary system' (N39), and 'pain in throat and chest' (R07), all of which were higher than expected (SARs ranging 1.57-6.66).ConclusionA range of reasons for non-psychiatric hospitalisation in SMI is apparent, with self-harm, self-neglect and/or reduced healthcare access, and medically unexplained symptoms as potential underlying explanations.
| S-EPMC6236443 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Serious mental illness (SMI) with psychiatric instability accounts for disproportionately high use of emergency room visits and hospitalizations.To evaluate the effectiveness of an automated telehealth intervention supported by nurse health care management for improving psychiatric illness management and reducing acute service use among individuals with SMI and psychiatric instability.Thirty-eight individuals with SMI received the automated telehealth intervention for 6 months. Psychiatric symptoms, illness self-management, and self-reported service use (emergency room visits and hospital admissions) were collected at baseline, 3- and 6-months. Measures of quality of life, health indicators, and subjective health status were also collected.Participants demonstrated improvements in self-reported psychiatric symptoms and illness self-management skills, an 82% decrease in hospital admissions (from 76 to 14 hospitalizations, p < 0.001) and a 75% decrease in emergency room visits (from 63 to 16 visits, p < 0.001). Improvements were also observed in quality of life, severity of depressive symptoms, and mental health status.These highly promising findings support the use of an automated telehealth device monitored by a nurse care manager for people with SMI, and highlight the potential for cost savings through reductions in acute health care utilization.
| S-EPMC5506829 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundPeople with serious mental illnesses (SMI) such as schizophrenia often also have physical health illnesses and interventions are needed to address the resultant multimorbidity and reduced life expectancy. Research has shown that volunteers can support people with SMI. This protocol describes a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT) of a novel intervention involving volunteer 'Health Champions' supporting people with SMI to manage and improve their physical health.MethodsThis is a feasibility hybrid II randomised effectiveness-implementation controlled trial. The intervention involves training volunteers to be 'Health Champions' to support individual people with SMI using mental health services. This face-to-face or remote support will take place weekly and last for up to 9 months following initial introduction. This study will recruit 120 participants to compare Health Champions to treatment as usual for people with SMI using secondary community mental health services in South London, UK. We will measure the clinical and cost effectiveness including quality of life. We will measure the implementation outcomes of acceptability, feasibility, appropriateness, fidelity, barriers and enablers, unintended consequences, adoption and sustainability.DiscussionThere is a need for interventions to support people with SMI with their physical health. If this feasibility trial is successful, a definitive trial will follow to fully evaluate the clinical, cost and implementation effectiveness of Health Champions supporting people with SMI.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, registration no: NCT04124744 .
| S-EPMC8165672 | biostudies-literature
Project description:People living with serious mental illness (SMI) have shorter life expectancies than the general population. We examined how contextual factors influence the physical health of this population. We conducted interviews, focus groups, and participant observations with stakeholders from six behavioral health organizations. We found that consumers' avoidance of overt disagreement during medical visits, their mistrust of medical institutions, and cultural variations in body image influenced the clinical encounter. Mental health providers' ambivalence about intervening in consumers' physical health, primary care providers' misattribution of physical symptoms to mental disorders, and providers' stigmatization of consumers shaped clinical encounters. Consumers' diets were shaped by food environments and social norms associated with traditional diets. Internal and external factors impacted consumers' physical activity. In this article, we illustrate the importance of considering contextual factors in the development and implementation of interventions aimed at improving the physical health of people with SMI.
| S-EPMC4276729 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPeer support provides the opportunity for peers with experiential knowledge of a mental illness to give emotional, appraisal and informational assistance to current service users, and is becoming an important recovery-oriented approach in healthcare for people with mental illness.ObjectivesTo assess the effects of peer-support interventions for people with schizophrenia or other serious mental disorders, compared to standard care or other supportive or psychosocial interventions not from peers.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials on 27 July 2016 and 4 July 2017. There were no limitations regarding language, date, document type or publication status.Selection criteriaWe selected all randomised controlled clinical studies involving people diagnosed with schizophrenia or other related serious mental illness that compared peer support to standard care or other psychosocial interventions and that did not involve 'peer' individual/group(s). We included studies that met our inclusion criteria and reported useable data. Our primary outcomes were service use and global state (relapse).Data collection and analysisThe authors of this review complied with the Cochrane recommended standard of conduct for data screening and collection. Two review authors independently screened the studies, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. Any disagreement was resolved by discussion until the authors reached a consensus. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for binary data, and the mean difference and its 95% CI for continuous data. We used a random-effects model for analyses. We assessed the quality of evidence and created a 'Summary of findings' table using the GRADE approach.Main resultsThis review included 13 studies with 2479 participants. All included studies compared peer support in addition to standard care with standard care alone. We had significant concern regarding risk of bias of included studies as over half had an unclear risk of bias for the majority of the risk domains (i.e. random sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, attrition and selective reporting). Additional concerns regarding blinding of participants and outcome assessment, attrition and selective reporting were especially serious, as about a quarter of the included studies were at high risk of bias for these domains.All included studies provided useable data for analyses but only two trials provided useable data for two of our main outcomes of interest, and there were no data for one of our primary outcomes, relapse. Peer support appeared to have little or no effect on hospital admission at medium term (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.11 to 1.75; participants = 19; studies = 1, very low-quality evidence) or all-cause death in the long term (RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.43 to 5.31; participants = 555; studies = 1, very low-quality evidence). There were no useable data for our other prespecified important outcomes: days in hospital, clinically important change in global state (improvement), clinically important change in quality of life for peer supporter and service user, or increased cost to society.One trial compared peer support with clinician-led support but did not report any useable data for the above main outcomes.Authors' conclusionsCurrently, very limited data are available for the effects of peer support for people with schizophrenia. The risk of bias within trials is of concern and we were unable to use the majority of data reported in the included trials. In addition, the few that were available, were of very low quality. The current body of evidence is insufficient to either refute or support the use of peer-support interventions for people with schizophrenia and other mental illness.
| S-EPMC6448529 | biostudies-literature