232
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Investigating the efficacy of an individualized metacognitive therapy program (MCT+) for psychosis: study protocol of a multi-center randomized controlled trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Psychological interventions are increasingly recommended as adjunctive treatments for psychosis, but their implementation in clinical practice is still insufficient. The individualized metacognitive therapy program (MCT+; www.uke.de/mct_plus) represents a low-threshold psychotherapeutic approach that synthesizes group metacognitive training (MCT) and cognitive behavioral therapy for psychosis, and addresses specific cognitive biases that are involved in the onset and maintenance of psychosis. It aims to “plant the seed of doubt” regarding rigid delusional convictions and to encourage patients to critically reflect, extend and change their approach to problem solving. Its second edition also puts more emphasis on affective symptoms. A recent meta-analysis of metacognitive interventions (MCT, MCT+) indicate small to moderate effects on positive symptoms and delusions, as well as high rates of acceptance. Nonetheless, no long-term studies of MCT+ involving large samples have been conducted.

          Methods

          The goal of the present multi-center, observer-blind, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial is to compare the efficacy of MCT+ against an active control (cognitive remediation; MyBrainTraining ©) in 328 patients with psychosis at three time points (baseline, immediately after intervention [6 weeks] and 6 months later). The primary outcome is change in psychosis symptoms over the 6-month follow-up period as assessed by the delusion subscale of the Psychotic Symptom Rating Scale. Secondary outcomes include jumping to conclusions, other positive symptoms of schizophrenia, depressive symptoms, self-esteem, quality of life, and cognitive insight. The study also seeks to elucidate mediating factors that promote versus impede symptom improvement across time.

          Discussion

          This is the first multi-center randomized controlled trial to test the efficacy of individualized MCT+ in a large sample of patients with psychosis. The rationale for the trial, the design, and the strengths and limitations of the study are discussed.

          Trial Registration

          The trial is registered through the German Clinical Trials Register ( www.drks.de) as DRKS00008001. Registered 6 May 2015.

          Related collections

          Most cited references50

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A meta-analysis of cognitive remediation for schizophrenia: methodology and effect sizes.

            Cognitive remediation therapy for schizophrenia was developed to treat cognitive problems that affect functioning, but the treatment effects may depend on the type of trial methodology adopted. The present meta-analysis will determine the effects of treatment and whether study method or potential moderators influence the estimates. Electronic databases were searched up to June 2009 using variants of the key words "cognitive," "training," "remediation," "clinical trial," and "schizophrenia." Key researchers were contacted to ensure that all studies meeting the criteria were included. This produced 109 reports of 40 studies in which ≥70% of participants had a diagnosis of schizophrenia, all of whom received standard care. There was a comparison group and allocation procedure in these studies. Data were available to calculate effect sizes on cognition and/or functioning. Data were independently extracted by two reviewers with excellent reliability. Methodological moderators were extracted through the Clinical Trials Assessment Measure and verified by authors in 94% of cases. The meta-analysis (2,104 participants) yielded durable effects on global cognition and functioning. The symptom effect was small and disappeared at follow-up assessment. No treatment element (remediation approach, duration, computer use, etc.) was associated with cognitive outcome. Cognitive remediation therapy was more effective when patients were clinically stable. Significantly stronger effects on functioning were found when cognitive remediation therapy was provided together with other psychiatric rehabilitation, and a much larger effect was present when a strategic approach was adopted together with adjunctive rehabilitation. Despite variability in methodological rigor, this did not moderate any of the therapy effects, and even in the most rigorous studies there were similar small-to-moderate effects. Cognitive remediation benefits people with schizophrenia, and when combined with psychiatric rehabilitation, this benefit generalizes to functioning, relative to rehabilitation alone. These benefits cannot be attributed to poor study methods.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A new instrument for measuring insight: the Beck Cognitive Insight Scale.

              The clinical measurements of insight have focused primarily on patients' unawareness of their having a mental disorder and of their need for treatment ([Acta Psychiatr. Scand. 89 (1994) 62; Am. J. Psychiatry 150 (1993) 873]; etc.). A complementary approach focuses on some of the cognitive processes involved in patients' re-evaluation of their anomalous experiences and of their specific misinterpretations: distancing, objectivity, perspective, and self-correction. The Beck Cognitive Insight Scale (BCIS) was developed to evaluate patients' self-reflectiveness and their overconfidence in their interpretations of their experiences. A 15-item self-report questionnaire was subjected to a principle components analysis, yielding a 9-item self-reflectiveness subscale and a 6-item self-certainty subscale. A composite index of the BCIS reflecting cognitive insight was calculated by subtracting the score for the self-certainty scale from that of the self-reflectiveness scale. The scale demonstrated good convergent, discriminant, and construct validity: (a) the BCIS composite index showed a significant correlation with being aware of having a mental disorder on the Scale to Assess Unawareness of Mental Disorder (SUMD; Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 51 (1994) 826) and the self-reflectiveness subscale was significantly correlated with being aware of delusions on the SUMD, (b) the composite index score of the BCIS differentiated inpatients with psychotic diagnoses from inpatients without psychotic diagnoses, and (c) in a separate study, change scores on the BCIS were significantly correlated with change scores on positive and negative symptoms. The results provided tentative support for the validity of the BCIS. Suggestions were made for further investigation of the cognitive processes involved in identifying and correcting erroneous beliefs and misinterpretations.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                b.schneider@uke.de
                martin.bruene@ruhr-uni-bochum.de
                f.bohn@uke.de
                r.veckenstedt@uke.de
                k.kolbeck@uke.de
                ev.krieger@asklepios.com
                anna.becker@zi-mannheim.de
                kim-alisha.drommelschmidt@lwl.org
                susanne.englisch@zi-mannheim.de
                sarah.eisenacher@zi-mannheim.de
                sie-in.lee-grimm@lwl.org
                ma.nagel@asklepios.com
                mathias.zink@zi-mannheim.de
                moritz@uke.de
                Journal
                BMC Psychiatry
                BMC Psychiatry
                BMC Psychiatry
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-244X
                27 February 2016
                27 February 2016
                2016
                : 16
                : 51
                Affiliations
                [ ]Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
                [ ]LWL University Hospital Bochum, Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Preventative Medicine, Division of Cognitive Neuropsychiatry and Psychiatric Preventative Medicine, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
                [ ]Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Asklepios North-Wandsbek, Hamburg, Germany
                [ ]Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
                [ ]Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
                Article
                756
                10.1186/s12888-016-0756-2
                4769526
                26921116
                5b372e87-ef77-4c0d-b0d0-f612fc5875de
                © Schneider et al. 2016

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 10 February 2016
                : 18 February 2016
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100001659, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft;
                Award ID: MO 969/16-1
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Study Protocol
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2016

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                schizophrenia,metacognitive training,psychosis,cognitive biases,delusions

                Comments

                Comment on this article