Dataset Information

Randomised clinical trial of community-based peer-led and psychologist-led group treatment for hoarding disorder.

ABSTRACT: Background:Treatment for hoarding disorder is typically performed by mental health professionals, potentially limiting access to care in underserved areas. Aims:We aimed to conduct a non-inferiority trial of group peer-facilitated therapy (G-PFT) and group psychologist-led cognitive-behavioural therapy (G-CBT). Method:We randomised 323 adults with hording disorder 15 weeks of G-PFT or 16 weeks of G-CBT and assessed at baseline, post-treatment and longitudinally (?3 months post-treatment: mean 14.4 months, range 3-25). Predictors of treatment response were examined. Results:G-PFT (effect size 1.20) was as effective as G-CBT (effect size 1.21; between-group difference 1.82 points, t = -1.71, d.f. = 245, P = 0.04). More homework completion and ongoing help from family and friends resulted in lower severity scores at longitudinal follow-up (t = 2.79, d.f. = 175, P = 0.006; t = 2.89, d.f. = 175, P = 0.004). Conclusions:Peer-led groups were as effective as psychologist-led groups, providing a novel treatment avenue for individuals without access to mental health professionals. Declaration of interest:C.A.M. has received grant funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and travel reimbursement and speakers' honoraria from the Tourette Association of America (TAA), as well as honoraria and travel reimbursement from the NIH for serving as an NIH Study Section reviewer. K.D. receives research support from the NIH and honoraria and travel reimbursement from the NIH for serving as an NIH Study Section reviewer. R.S.M. receives research support from the National Institute of Mental Health, National Institute of Aging, the Hillblom Foundation, Janssen Pharmaceuticals (research grant) and the Alzheimer's Association. R.S.M. has also received travel support from the National Institute of Mental Health for Workshop participation. J.Y.T. receives research support from the NIH, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute and the California Tobacco Related Research Program, and honoraria and travel reimbursement from the NIH for serving as an NIH Study Section reviewer. All other authors report no conflicts of interest.

SUBMITTER: Mathews CA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6066983 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Randomised clinical trial of community-based peer-led and psychologist-led group treatment for hoarding disorder.

Mathews Carol A CA Mackin Robert Scott RS Chou Chia-Ying CY Uhm Soo Y SY Bain Larry David LD Stark Sandra J SJ Gause Michael M Vigil Ofilio R OR Franklin John J Salazar Mark M Plumadore Julian J Smith Lauren C LC Komaiko Kiya K Howell Gillian G Vega Eduardo E Chan Joanne J Eckfield Monika B MB Tsoh Janice Y JY Delucchi Kevin K

BJPsych open 20180720 4

<h4>Background</h4>Treatment for hoarding disorder is typically performed by mental health professionals, potentially limiting access to care in underserved areas.<h4>Aims</h4>We aimed to conduct a non-inferiority trial of group peer-facilitated therapy (G-PFT) and group psychologist-led cognitive-behavioural therapy (G-CBT).<h4>Method</h4>We randomised 323 adults with hording disorder 15 weeks of G-PFT or 16 weeks of G-CBT and assessed at baseline, post-treatment and longitudinally (≥3 months p ...[more]

PMID: 30083381

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundParent carers of children with special educational needs or disability are at higher risk of poor mental and physical health. The need for a tailored, peer-led group programme was raised by parent carers, who co-developed the Healthy Parent Carers programme with researchers. This study aimed to test the feasibility of programme delivery in community settings, and the feasibility and acceptability of a randomised controlled trial design.MethodsParticipants were individually randomised with concealed allocation to a structured group programme and access to online resources (intervention), or access to the online resources only (control). Measures of wellbeing and secondary and economic outcomes were collected before randomisation, immediately post-intervention, and 6 months post-intervention. Descriptive statistics on recruitment and attrition, demographics, attendance, and fidelity of intervention delivery were analysed with feedback on the acceptability of the trial design.ResultsOne hundred and ninety-three parent carers expressed an interest in taking part. Ninety-two participants recruited from across six sites were randomised (47 intervention, 45 control). Lead and assistant facilitators were trained and delivered the group sessions. Sixteen (34%) participants in the intervention arm did not attend any sessions, and attendance varied across sites and sessions. One participant withdrew post-randomisation, and 83 (90%) participants completed outcome measures at the six-month follow-up.ConclusionsThe study demonstrated that it was feasible to deliver the programme in community settings. The number of parent carers who expressed interest signifies the need for such a programme and the feasibility of recruiting to a definitive trial. Loss to follow-up was low. Further research is needed to explore ways to reduce barriers to participation in person and assess the feasibility and acceptability of programme content and delivery for more ethnically diverse groups, and potentially using interpreters. Given the Covid-19 pandemic and delivery format feedback, there is also a need to investigate remote or blended delivery strategies. Although the results indicate that a definitive trial is feasible, programme impact would be strengthened through exploration of these uncertainties.Trial registrationISRCTN, ISRCTN15144652 , registered on 25 October 2018, ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03705221 , registered on 15 October 2018.

Project description:BackgroundAdvanced resuscitation skills training is an important and enjoyable part of medical training, but requires small group instruction to ensure active participation of all students. Increases in student numbers have made this increasingly difficult to achieve.MethodsA single-blind randomised controlled trial of peer-led vs. expert-led resuscitation training was performed using a group of sixth-year medical students as peer instructors. The expert instructors were a senior and a middle grade doctor, and a nurse who is an Advanced Life Support (ALS) Instructor.A power calculation showed that the trial would have a greater than 90% chance of rejecting the null hypothesis (that expert-led groups performed 20% better than peer-led groups) if that were the true situation. Secondary outcome measures were the proportion of High Pass grades in each groups and safety incidents.The peer instructors designed and delivered their own course material. To ensure safety, the peer-led groups used modified defibrillators that could deliver only low-energy shocks.Blinded assessment was conducted using an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE). The checklist items were based on International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) guidelines using Ebel standard-setting methods that emphasised patient and staff safety and clinical effectiveness.The results were analysed using Exact methods, chi-squared and t-test.ResultsA total of 132 students were randomised: 58 into the expert-led group, 74 into the peer-led group. 57/58 (98%) of students from the expert-led group achieved a Pass compared to 72/74 (97%) from the peer-led group: Exact statistics confirmed that it was very unlikely (p = 0.0001) that the expert-led group was 20% better than the peer-led group.There were no safety incidents, and High Pass grades were achieved by 64 (49%) of students: 33/58 (57%) from the expert-led group, 31/74 (42%) from the peer-led group. Exact statistics showed that the difference of 15% meant that it was possible that the expert-led teaching was 20% better at generating students with High Passes.ConclusionsThe key elements of advanced cardiac resuscitation can be safely and effectively taught to medical students in small groups by peer-instructors who have undergone basic medical education training.

Project description:Background:Parent carers of disabled children are at increased risk of mental and physical health problems. They often experience challenges to maintaining good health which have implications for their well-being and their ability to care for their children. In response to these needs, researchers and parent carers developed the Healthy Parent Carers (HPC) programme. It is a peer-led, group-based intervention that promotes behaviours associated with health and well-being. The aims of this trial are to assess the acceptability of the HPC programme and the feasibility of its delivery in the community and to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the design of the definitive trial to evaluate the programme's effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Methods:We will establish six research sites and train facilitators to deliver the manualised intervention. Parent carers of children with special educational needs and disabilities will be individually randomised, stratified by group delivery site, to either take part in a group programme and online resources (intervention) or to receive access to the online resources only (control). Measures of mental health; well-being; health-related quality of life; health behaviours; patient activation; protective factors such as resilience, social connections, and practical support; and use of health care, social care, and wider societal resources will be collected before randomisation (baseline), immediately post-intervention, and 6 months later. Recruitment of participants, adherence to the programme, and the dose received will be assessed. Group sessions will be audio-recorded to evaluate the fidelity of delivery and participant engagement. Participants' and facilitators' feedback on the programme content and delivery, their experience, and the acceptability of the outcome measures and trial design will be collected through feedback forms, interviews, and focus groups. Discussion:This trial will assess whether the programme delivery and evaluative trial design are feasible, to inform whether to progress to a definitive randomised controlled trial to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Healthy Parent Carers programme. Trial registration:ISRCTN, ISRCTN151144652, registered on 25 October 2018; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03705221, registered on 15 October 2018.

Project description:IntroductionIn June 2021, United Nations (UN) Member States committed to ambitious targets for scaling up community-led responses by 2025 toward meeting the goals of ending the AIDS epidemic by 2030. These targets build on UN Member States 2016 commitments to ensure that 30% of HIV testing and treatment programmes are community-led by 2030. At its current pace, the world is not likely to meet these nor other global HIV targets, as evidenced by current epidemiologic trends. The COVID-19 pandemic threatens to further slow momentum made to date. The purpose of this paper is to review available evidence on the comparative advantages of community-led HIV responses that can better inform policy making towards getting the world back on track.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review to gather available evidence on peer- and community-led HIV responses. Using UNAIDS' definition of 'community-led' and following PRISMA guidelines, we searched peer-reviewed literature published from January 1982 through September 2020. We limited our search to articles reporting findings from randomized controlled trials as well as from quasi-experimental, prospective, pre/post-test evaluation, and cross-sectional study designs. The overall goals of this scoping review were to gather available evidence on community-led responses and their impact on HIV outcomes, and to identify key concepts that can be used to quickly inform policy, practice, and research.FindingsOur initial search yielded 279 records. After screening for relevance and conducting cross-validation, 48 articles were selected. Most studies took place in the global south (n = 27) and a third (n = 17) involved youth. Sixty-five percent of articles (n = 31) described the comparative advantage of peer- and community-led direct services, e.g., prevention and education (n = 23) testing, care, and treatment programs (n = 8). We identified more than 40 beneficial outcomes linked to a range of peer- and community-led HIV activities. They include improved HIV-related knowledge, attitudes, intentions, self-efficacy, risk behaviours, risk appraisals, health literacy, adherence, and viral suppression. Ten studies reported improvements in HIV service access, quality, linkage, utilization, and retention resulting from peer- or community-led programs or initiatives. Three studies reported structural level changes, including positive influences on clinic wait times, treatment stockouts, service coverage, and exclusionary practices.Conclusions and recommendationsFindings from our scoping review underscore the comparative advantage of peer- and community-led HIV responses. Specifically, the evidence from the published literature leads us to recommend, where possible, that prevention programs, especially those intended for people living with and disproportionately affected by HIV, be peer- and community-led. In addition, treatment services should strive to integrate specific peer- and community-led components informed by differentiated care models. Future research is needed and should focus on generating additional quantitative evidence on cost effectiveness and on the synergistic effects of bundling two or more peer- and community-led interventions.

Project description:IntroductionMany stroke survivors have unmet psychosocial needs during the recovery phase following a stroke. There is emerging evidence that peer support interventions may play a valuable role in managing stroke. However, evidence regarding the effectiveness of peer support interventions on the psychosocial outcomes of stroke survivors is uncertain. This study aims to develop a nurse-led peer support intervention for stroke survivors based on the Person-Environment-Occupation-Performance Model and evaluate its effects on the psychosocial outcomes of stroke survivors.Methods and analysisThis is an assessor-blinded two-arm randomised controlled trial. A convenience sample of 120 stroke survivors will be recruited from two community centres and one rehabilitation unit in Yangzhou, a medium-sized city in eastern China, with 60 participants each in the intervention and control groups. The participants allocated to the intervention group will receive the nurse-led peer support intervention, which includes 6 weekly peer support sessions facilitated by a nurse and at least one peer facilitator. Participants randomised to the control group will receive the same dose of interpersonal interaction as intervention participants, including weekly individual face-to-face session for 6 weeks. The primary outcomes are social participation and participation self-efficacy. The secondary outcomes are psychosocial distress, social support, stigma towards disease, self-efficacy in managing chronic conditions and quality of life. Data will be collected at baseline, immediately after the intervention and 3 months after the intervention. A process evaluation will be conducted qualitatively and quantitively to examine the mechanism by which the intervention impacts the psychosocial outcomes of stroke survivors. All outcomes will be analysed following the intention to treat principle. Generalised Estimation Equation models will be used to assess the intervention effect.Ethics and disseminationThis protocol was approved by the Joint Chinese University of Hong Kong-New Territories East Cluster Clinical Research Ethics Committee (CREC Ref. No.: 2021.196-T). All participants will be required to provide written informed consent. Results of the study will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals and presentation at local or international conferences.Trial registration numberChiCTR2100050853.

Project description:BackgroundAdolescents living with HIV have poor virological suppression and high prevalence of common mental disorders (CMDs). In Zimbabwe, the Zvandiri adolescent peer support programme is effective at improving virological suppression. We assessed the effect of training Zvandiri peer counsellors known as Community Adolescent Treatment Supporters (CATS) in problem-solving therapy (PST) on virological suppression and mental health outcomes.Methods and findingsSixty clinics were randomised 1:1 to either normal Zvandiri peer counselling or a peer counsellor trained in PST. In January to March 2019, 842 adolescents aged 10 to 19 years and living with HIV who screened positive for CMDs were enrolled (375 (44.5%) male and 418 (49.6%) orphaned of at least one parent). The primary outcome was virological nonsuppression (viral load ≥1,000 copies/mL). Secondary outcomes were symptoms of CMDs measured with the Shona Symptom Questionnaire (SSQ ≥8) and depression measured with the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9 ≥10) and health utility score using the EQ-5D. The adjusted odds ratios (AORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using logistic regression adjusting for clinic-level clustering. Case reviews and focus group discussions were used to determine feasibility of intervention delivery. At baseline, 35.1% of participants had virological nonsuppression and 70.3% had SSQ≥8. After 48 weeks, follow-up was 89.5% for viral load data and 90.9% for other outcomes. Virological nonsuppression decreased in both arms, but there was no evidence of an intervention effect (prevalence of nonsuppression 14.7% in the Zvandiri-PST arm versus 11.9% in the Zvandiri arm; AOR = 1.29; 95% CI 0.68, 2.48; p = 0.44). There was strong evidence of an apparent effect on common mental health outcomes (SSQ ≥8: 2.4% versus 10.3% [AOR = 0.19; 95% CI 0.08, 0.46; p < 0.001]; PHQ-9 ≥10: 2.9% versus 8.8% [AOR = 0.32; 95% CI 0.14, 0.78; p = 0.01]). Prevalence of EQ-5D index score <1 was 27.6% versus 38.9% (AOR = 0.56; 95% CI 0.31, 1.03; p = 0.06). Qualitative analyses found that CATS-observed participants had limited autonomy or ability to solve problems. In response, the CATS adapted the intervention to focus on empathic problem discussion to fit adolescents' age, capacity, and circumstances, which was beneficial. Limitations include that cost data were not available and that the mental health tools were validated in adult populations, not adolescents.ConclusionsPST training for CATS did not add to the benefit of peer support in reducing virological nonsuppression but led to improved symptoms of CMD and depression compared to standard Zvandiri care among adolescents living with HIV in Zimbabwe. Active involvement of caregivers and strengthened referral structures could increase feasibility and effectiveness.Trial registrationPan African Clinical Trials Registry PACTR201810756862405.

Dataset Information

Randomised clinical trial of community-based peer-led and psychologist-led group treatment for hoarding disorder.

Publications

Randomised clinical trial of community-based peer-led and psychologist-led group treatment for hoarding disorder.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets