Dataset Information

Peer mentorship as an adjunct intervention for the treatment of eating disorders: A pilot randomized trial.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:Peer mentorship has been shown to be helpful for other mental health conditions, but it has been understudied for patients with eating disorders. The goal of the present study was to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of peer mentorship for individuals with eating disorders by conducting a randomized controlled trial (RCT). TRIAL DESIGN:Parallel three-arm pilot RCT with 1:1:1 allocation to peer mentorship, social support mentorship (active comparison intervention), and waiting list. METHOD:Sixty outpatients with anorexia nervosa (AN), bulimia nervosa (BN), or binge-eating disorder (BED) were randomly assigned to a condition. Outcome measures, including eating disorder symptoms and general psychopathology, were completed at baseline, mid-, and postintervention. RESULTS:Session attendance and acceptability ratings were higher in peer mentorship than social support mentorship. More participants in social support mentorship (39%) dropped out compared to peer mentorship (5%). In intent-to-treat analysis, peer mentorship showed greater reductions in body dissatisfaction and anxiety compared with both control groups. Compared with social support mentorship, peer mentorship had greater reductions in depression. Compared with waiting list, peer mentorship had greater reduction in binge eating days/week in patients with BN/BED and restriction days/week in patients with AN. Peer mentorship did not impact body mass index or reentry into higher level of care. DISCUSSION:This pilot RCT provides preliminary evidence that peer mentorship is effective for some cognitive and behavioral symptoms of eating disorders as an adjunct to outpatient treatment. Additional studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy of peer mentorship in absence of treatment.

SUBMITTER: Ranzenhofer LM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7383944 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Peer mentorship as an adjunct intervention for the treatment of eating disorders: A pilot randomized trial.

Ranzenhofer Lisa M LM Wilhelmy Mylene M Hochschild Annabella A Sanzone Kaitlin K Walsh B Timothy BT Attia Evelyn E

The International journal of eating disorders 20200311 5

<h4>Objective</h4>Peer mentorship has been shown to be helpful for other mental health conditions, but it has been understudied for patients with eating disorders. The goal of the present study was to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of peer mentorship for individuals with eating disorders by conducting a randomized controlled trial (RCT).<h4>Trial design</h4>Parallel three-arm pilot RCT with 1:1:1 allocation to peer mentorship, social support mentorship (active comparison intervention), an ...[more]

PMID: 32159243

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPatients receiving in-center hemodialysis experience disproportionate morbidity and incur high healthcare-related costs. Much of this cost stems from potentially avoidable hospitalizations. Peer mentorship has been used effectively to improve outcomes for patients with complex chronic diseases. We propose testing the efficacy of peer mentorship on hospitalization rates among patients receiving hemodialysis.MethodsThis is a multicenter parallel group randomized controlled pragmatic trial of patients treated at hemodialysis facilities in Bronx, NY and Nashville, TN. The study has two phases. Phase 1 will enroll and train 16 hemodialysis patients (10 in Bronx, NY and 6 in Nashville TN) to be mentors using a program focused on enhancing self-efficacy, dialysis self-management and autonomy-supportive communication skills. Phase 2 will enroll 200 high risk adults receiving hemodialysis (140 in Bronx, NY and 60 in Nashville, TN), half of whom will be randomized to intervention and half to usual care. Intervention participants are assigned to weekly telephone calls with trained mentors (see Phase 1) for a 3-month period. The primary outcome of Phase 1 will be engagement of mentors with training and change in knowledge scores and autonomy skills from pre- to post-training. The primary outcome of Phase 2 will be the composite count of ED visits and hospitalizations at the end of study follow-up in patient participants assigned to intervention as compared to those assigned to usual care. Secondary outcomes for Phase 2 include the change over the trial period in validated survey scores measuring perception of social support and self-efficacy, and dialysis adherence metrics, among intervention participants as compared to usual care participants.DiscussionThe PEER-HD study will test the feasibility and efficacy of a pragmatic peer-mentorship program designed for patients receiving hemodialysis on ED visit and hospitalization rates. If effective, peer-mentorship holds promise as a scalable patient-centered intervention to decrease hospital resource utilization, and by extension morbidity and cost, for patients receiving maintenance in-center hemodialysis.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03595748 ; 7/23/2018.Trial sponsorNational Institutes of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Disease (NIDDK) 5R18DK118471.FundingFunding for this study was provided by the National Institutes of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Disease: R18DK118471.Study statusThis is an ongoing study and not complete. We are still collecting data for observational follow-up on participants.Related articlesNo related articles for this study have been submitted to any journal. The study sponsor and funders had no role in the design, analysis or interpretation of this data. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Project description:BackgroundEating disorders (EDs) are serious psychiatric illnesses that have high rates of morbidity and mortality, and low long-term recovery rates. Peer mentor programs (PMPs) have been associated with reduced psychiatric hospitalisation and shorter lengths of stay for those with other severe mental illnesses. The present study evaluated the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a PMP for individuals with EDs in improving symptomatology and quality of life.MethodsThirty mentees and seventeen mentors were recruited. The PMP involved thirteen sessions over 6 months. Participants completed measures assessing ED symptomatology, quality of life (QoL), mood and perceived disability. Changes in symptomatology before and after the PMP were tested by Wilcoxon signed rank tests. Semi-structured interviews were conducted for qualitative evaluation of the PMP.ResultsThe program was deemed to have moderate feasibility with eight of 30 mentees, and two of 17 mentors withdrawing. Completion rates ranged from 2 to 16 sessions, and between 3 and 45 weeks. Mentees demonstrated improvements in body mass index, QoL, ED symptomatology, mood (depression, anxiety and tension/stress) and perceived disability from pre- to post-program. Mentors demonstrated significant increases in ED symptomatology, but no worsening of QoL, mood or perceived disability. Qualitative findings from both mentees and mentors were positive: emergent themes included hope for recovery, a sense of agency and inspiration gained from interaction with someone with lived experience of an ED.ConclusionsThis pilot study suggests feasibility of the PMP for individuals with EDs. Mentees demonstrated improvements in ED symptomatology, QoL, mood and perceived disability. However, the increase in ED symptomatology reported by the mentors over the PMP highlights potential risks and the need for thorough monitoring while preliminary evaluation is undertaken. The mentoring relationship was a positive experience for both mentees and mentors, instilling an increased hope for recovery in mentees and an opportunity for mentors to reflect on their own recovery with increased confidence. The novel relationship formed throughout mentorship highlights a potential gap in current clinical support services, which warrants further exploration within a controlled trial.Trial registrationAustralian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registration Number: ACTRN12617001412325. Retrospectively registered: 05/10/2017. Date of first enrolment: 20/01/2017. https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=373741&isReview=true.

Project description:Approximately 3% of people receiving opioid substitution therapy (OST) in the UK manage to achieve abstinence from prescribed and illicit drugs within three years of commencing treatment. Involvement of families and wider social networks in supporting psychological treatment may be an effective strategy in facilitating recovery, and this pilot study aimed to evaluate the impact of a social network-focused intervention for patients receiving OST.A two-site, open feasibility trial randomised patients receiving OST for at least 12 months but still reporting illicit opiate use in the past 28 days to one of three treatments: 1) treatment as usual (TAU), 2) Brief Social Behaviour and Network Therapy (B-SBNT)?+?TAU, or 3) Personal Goal Setting (PGS)?+?TAU. The two active interventions consisted of 4 sessions. There were 3 aims: 1) test the feasibility of recruiting OST patients to a trial of B-SBNT, and following them up over 12 months; 2) test the feasibility of training clinicians to deliver B-SBNT; 3) test whether B-SBNT reduces heroin use 3 and 12 months after treatment, and to explore potential mediating factors. The primary outcome for aim 3 was number of days of heroin use in the past month, and a range of secondary outcome measures were specified in advance (level of drug dependence, mental health, social satisfaction, therapist rapport, treatment satisfaction, social network size and support).A total of 83 participants were randomised, and 70 (84%) were followed-up at 12 months. Fidelity analysis of showed that B-SBNT sessions were clearly distinguishable from PGS and TAU sessions, suggesting it was possible to train clinical staff to an adequate level of competence. No significant differences were found between the 3 intervention arms in the primary or secondary outcome measures. Attendance at psychosocial treatment intervention sessions was low across all three arms (44% overall).Patients receiving OST can be recruited into a trial of a social network-based intervention, but poor attendance at treatment sessions makes it uncertain whether an adequate dose of treatment was delivered. In order to achieve the benefits of psychosocial interventions, further work is needed to overcome poor engagement.ISRCTN Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN22608399 . Date of registration: 27/04/2012. Date of first randomisation: 14/08/2012.

Project description:Background: Positive psychological interventions (PPIs) have been suggested to produce benefits in patients with eating disorders (ED) by improving well-being, which might act as a buffer of the harmful effects caused by the disorder. Best Possible Self (BPS) is a PPI which consists of writing and envisioning a future where everything has turned out in the best possible way. In this regard, positive technology (PT) can be of considerable benefit as it allows to implement specific PPIs that have already shown efficacy. Objective: This study tested the preliminary efficacy of the BPS exercise implemented through a PT application and carried out for 1 month, in improving positive functioning measures, compared to a control condition, in patients with ED. Follow-up effects were also explored at 1 and 3 months later. Methods: This is a pilot randomized controlled trial, with two experimental conditions. Participants were 54 outpatients, who were receiving ongoing specialized treatment in ED services. 29 participants were randomly allocated to the BPS intervention and 25 to the control exercise. The sample was composed mostly by females and the mean age was 27 years. In the intervention group, participants had to write about their BPS. In the control group participants had to write about their daily activities. The exercise was conducted through the Book of Life, which is a PT application that allows users to add multimedia materials to the written content. Measures of future expectations, affect, dispositional optimism, hope and self-efficacy were assessed at different time frames. Results: Findings showed that all participants improved over time and there were no statistically significant differences between conditions on the specific measures. These effects were not influenced by prior levels of ED severity. Within-group effect sizes indicate a greater benefit for the participants in the BPS condition, compared to the control condition, on nearly all the measures. Conclusion: Results indicated that PT produced modest improvements in patients with EDs that are receiving current treatment for ED. More empirical attention is needed to explore the potential benefits of PPIs as supporting tools in the prevention and treatment of EDs. Trial registration: clinicaltrails.gov Identifier: NCT03003910, retrospectively registered December 27, 2016.

Project description:BackgroundAntipsychotic medications have limited benefits in schizophrenia, and cognitive behavioral therapy may be beneficial as an adjunct. There may be potential for implementing mobile cognitive behavioral therapy-based treatment for schizophrenia in addition to standard antipsychotic medications.ObjectiveThis study aims to determine whether PEAR-004, a smartphone-based investigational digital therapeutic, improves the symptoms of an acute psychotic exacerbation of schizophrenia when it is added to standard treatments.MethodsThis was a 12-week, multicenter, randomized, sham-controlled, rater-blinded, parallel group proof‑of‑concept study of 112 participants with moderate acute psychotic exacerbation in schizophrenia. This study was conducted in 6 clinical trial research sites in the United States from December 2018 to September 2019. The primary outcome, change in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) from baseline to week 12 or the last available visit, was analyzed using the mixed-effects regression model for repeated measures, applied to an intent-to-treat sample.ResultsThe total PANSS scores slightly decreased from baseline over the study period in both groups; the treatment difference at day 85 between PEAR-004 and sham was 2.7 points, in favor of the sham (2-sided P=.09). The secondary scales found no benefit, except for transient improvement in depressive symptoms with PEAR-004. Application engagement was good, and patient and clinical investigator satisfaction was high. No safety concerns were observed. There was some evidence of study site heterogeneity for the onboarding processes and directions on PEAR-004 product use at baseline and throughout the study. However, these differences did not affect the efficacy results.ConclusionsIn the largest-to-date randomized, sham-controlled study of a digital therapeutic in schizophrenia, PEAR-004 did not demonstrate an effect on the primary outcome-total PANSS scores-when compared with a nonspecific digital sham control. The secondary and exploratory results also did not demonstrate any notable benefits, except for possible temporary improvement in depressive symptoms. This study provided many useful scientific and operational insights that can be used in the further clinical development of PEAR-004 and other investigational digital therapeutics.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03751280; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03751280.

Project description:BackgroundCardiovascular disease (CVD) is the most common cause of death among people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), with an estimated increased risk of 50-60% compared to the general population. Lipid-lowering strategies have been shown to lower CVD risk significantly in people with RA and hyperlipidemia. Thus, CVD risk assessment has an important role to play in reducing CVD among people with RA. Yet currently only 37 to 45% of this population are receiving primary lipids screening. This paper describes the CArdiovascular Risk assEssment for RA (CARE RA) intervention, which is designed to address this issue. CARE RA is a peer coach intervention, that is, an intervention in which a person with RA coaches another person with RA, which is designed to educate people with RA about the relation between RA and CVD risk and to help them obtain evidence-based CVD risk assessment and treatment.MethodsThis is an open-label pilot study that will test if the participants assigned to complete the CARE RA curriculum with a peer coach will receive a cardiovascular risk assessment more frequently compared to those that complete the CARE RA curriculum by themselves. The CARE RA intervention is guided by Social Cognitive Theory. Participants in the peer coach intervention arm will receive the assistance of a peer coach who will call the participants once a week for 5 weeks to go over the CARE RA curriculum and train them on how to obtain CVD risk assessment. The control arm will complete the CARE RA curriculum without any assistance. Participants will be randomized 1:1 either to the control arm or to the peer coach intervention arm. The primary outcome is a participant's having a CVD risk assessment or initiating a statin, if indicated. Secondary outcomes include patient activation and RA medication adherence. The RE-AIM implementation framework guides the implementation and evaluation of the intervention.DiscussionThis pilot study will test the feasibility of the peer coach intervention in anticipation of a larger trial. CARE RA pioneers the use of peer coaches to facilitate the implementation of evidence-based treatment guidelines among people with RA.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04488497 . Registered on July 28, 2020.

Dataset Information

Peer mentorship as an adjunct intervention for the treatment of eating disorders: A pilot randomized trial.

Publications

Peer mentorship as an adjunct intervention for the treatment of eating disorders: A pilot randomized trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets