Explore the vast range of titles available.

The implementation of early intervention services (EIS) dedicated to first episode psychosis (FEP) remains a challenge in France. In 2016, the London School of Economics published a report in which France appeared as a poorly developed country in terms of early intervention services. Since the 1980s, the French psychiatric “sectorization” system offers access to general psychiatric care with a graduated intensity (outpatient consultations, day hospitalization, full time hospitalization) targeting territories (“sectors”) of approximately 70,000 inhabitants. While this system has advantages in terms of universal access to care, it leaves little room for specialized services. The Greater Lyon agglomeration (2.4 million inhabitants) is composed of several psychiatric sectors administered by 3 psychiatric hospitals and a psychiatric emergency system administered by a University Hospital. Since 2018, various hospital and university stakeholders, patient associations and international partners, have been working together to tailor, set up and organize a care system for FEP patients. We present here how we have federated workforce resources initially working within 11 general psychiatric “sectors” and covering a population of 850,000 inhabitants. A 3-step process of (1) field analysis, (2) the creation of a community of practice composed of healthcare workers, researchers and service users, and (3) confrontation of the already existing healthcare with the logic of “principal components” for FEP care, allowed the creation of the outpatient “PEPS” service, which now offers continuous case management, a functional recovery program and new pathways to care to more than 200 patients with a diagnosis of first episode psychosis.

This systematic review and meta-analysis is the first to evaluate the effects of group-based social skills training (SST) on parent-report social responsiveness in adults with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). A total of 18 studies were included in the narrative review and among them five randomized-controlled trials (n = 145) were included in the meta-analysis. SST had large positive effects on social responsiveness. The narrative review identified that SST could improve patient’s outcomes in adults with ASD. These results should be interpreted with caution due to the moderate quality of the existing evidence, which could have inflated effect sizes. The absence of active comparator control groups makes unclear whether improvements at post-treatment are treatment-specific or are attributable to common factors to all psychotherapies.

IntroductionThe prognosis of first episode psychosis (FEP), which is a severe disorder, can be notably impaired by patients’ disengagement from healthcare providers. Coordinated specialty care with case management is now considered as the gold standard in this population, but there are still challenges for engagement with subsequent functional impairments. Youth-friendly and patient-centred clinical approaches are sought to improve engagement in patients with FEP. Mobile applications are widely used by young people, including patients with FEP, and can increase the youth friendliness of clinical tools. We hypothesise that a co-designed mobile application used during case management can improve functioning in patients with FEP as compared with usual case management practices.Methods and analysisA mobile case management application for planning and monitoring individualised care objectives will be co-designed with patients, caregivers and health professionals in a recovery-oriented approach. The application will be compared with usual case management practices in a multicentre, two-arm and parallel groups clinical trial. Patients will be recruited by specialised FEP teams. Impact on functioning will be assessed using the Personal and Social Performance Scale; the variation between baseline and 12 months in each group (control and active) will be the primary outcome.Ethics and disseminationThis study has been approved by the Inserm Institutional Review Board IRB00003888 (Comité d’évaluation éthique de l’INSERM, reference number 20-647). The results of the study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at national and international conferences. We will also communicate the results to patients and family representatives’ associations. An optimised version of the application will be then disseminated through the French FEP network (Transition Network).Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04657380

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been proposed as a therapeutic option for treatment-resistant auditory verbal hallucinations (AVH) in schizophrenia. In such cases, repeated sessions of tDCS are delivered with the anode over the left prefrontal cortex and the cathode over the left temporoparietal junction. Despite promising findings, the clinical response to tDCS is highly heterogeneous among patients. Here, we explored baseline differences between responders and nonresponders to frontotemporal tDCS using electric field modeling. We hypothesized that responders would display different tDCS-induced electric field strength in the brain areas involved in AVH compared to nonresponders.Using baseline structural MRI scans of 17 patients with schizophrenia and daily AVH who received 10 sessions of active frontotemporal tDCS, we constructed individual realistic whole brain models estimating electric field strength. Electric field maps were compared between responders (n = 6) and nonresponders to tDCS (n = 11) using an independent two-sample t test. Clinical response was defined as at least a 50% decrease of AVH 1 month after the last tDCS session.Results from the electric field map comparison showed that responders to tDCS displayed higher electric field strength in the left transverse temporal gyrus at baseline compared to nonresponders (T = 2.37; p = 0.016; 32 voxels).These preliminary findings suggested that the strength of the tDCS-induced electric field reaching the left transverse temporal gyrus could play an important role in the response to frontotemporal tDCS. In addition, this work suggests the interest of using electric field modeling to individualize tDCS and increase response rate.

Although transcranial Direct Current stimulation (tDCS) shows promise in the treatment of major depressive episodes, the optimal parameters and population to target remain unclear. We investigated the clinical interest of a 10 session tDCS regimen in patients with mild to severe treatment-resistant depression, in a pilot double-blind, randomized sham-controlled trial. tDCS was delivered over 5 consecutive days (two 30 min sessions per day separated by at least 2 h, 2 mA). The anode and cathode were placed over the left and the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, respectively. One month after tDCS, we observed significantly fewer patients who achieved remission (MADRS10 < 10) in the sham group (0 out of 18 patients) than in the active group (5 out of 21 patients; p = 0.05). However, no significant difference was observed between the groups regarding the mean scores of severity changes throughout the study period. Bifrontal add-on tDCS delivered twice per day over 5 days, in combination with antidepressant medication, can be a safe and suitable approach to achieve remission in patients with mild to severe treatment-resistant major depressive disorder. However, in regards to the pilot nature and limitations of the present study, further studies are needed before any frank conclusions can be made regarding the use of tDCS with the proposed parameters in clinical settings.

Background Clear guidance for successive antidepressant pharmacological treatments for non-responders in major depression is not well established. Method Based on the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method, the French Association for Biological Psychiatry and Neuropsychopharmacology and the fondation FondaMental developed expert consensus guidelines for the management of treatment-resistant depression. The expert guidelines combine scientific evidence and expert clinicians’ opinions to produce recommendations for treatment-resistant depression. A written survey comprising 118 questions related to highly-detailed clinical presentations was completed on a risk-benefit scale ranging from 0 to 9 by 36 psychiatrist experts in the field of major depression and its treatments. Key-recommendations are provided by the scientific committee after data analysis and interpretation of the results of the survey. Results The scope of these guidelines encompasses the assessment of pharmacological resistance and situations at risk of resistance, as well as the pharmacological and psychological strategies in major depression. Conclusion The expert consensus guidelines will contribute to facilitate treatment decisions for clinicians involved in the daily assessment and management of treatment-resistant depression across a number of common and complex clinical situations.

Abstract Background Despite growing evidence supporting the clinical interest of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in treatment-resistant depression (TRD), little is known regarding the effects of clinical and sociodemographic factors on the clinical outcome in patients. Methods We retrospectively investigated the effects of clinical (using the 3-factor model of the Montgomery-Åsberg depression rating scale [MADRS] encompassing dysphoria, retardation and vegetative symptoms) and sociodemographic characteristics of participants on clinical outcome in a sample of 54 TRD patients receiving low frequency rTMS (1 Hz, 360 pulses) applied over the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex combined with sham venlafaxine. Results Responders ( n = 29) displayed lower retardation baseline scores (13.6 ± 2.9) than non-responders (15.6 ± 2.9; n = 25; P = 0.02). We also observed a significant difference between the numbers of ex-smokers in responders and non-responders groups; all ex-smokers ( n = 8) were responders to rTMS ( P = 0.005). Conclusion Low MADRS retardation factor and ex-smoker status is highly prevalent in responders to low frequency rTMS. Further studies are needed to investigate the predictive value of these factors.

Background Recommendations for pharmacological treatments of major depression with specific comorbid psychiatric conditions are lacking. Method The French Association for Biological Psychiatry and Neuropsychopharmacology and the fondation FondaMental developed expert consensus guidelines for the management of depression based on the RAND/UCLA Appropriatneness Method. Recommendations for lines of treatment are provided by the scientific committee after data analysis and interpretation of the results of a survey of 36 psychiatrist experts in the field of major depression and its treatments. Results The expert guidelines combine scientific evidence and expert clinician’s opinion to produce recommendations for major depression with comorbid anxiety disorders, personality disorders or substance use disorders and in geriatric depression. Conclusion These guidelines provide direction addressing common clinical dilemmas that arise in the pharmacologic treatment of major depression with comorbid psychiatric conditions.

Background Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer burden worldwide. In France, it is the second most common cause of cancer death after lung cancer. Systematic uptake of CRC screening can improve survival rates. However, people with limited health literacy (HL) and lower socioeconomic position rarely participate. Our aim is to assess the impact of an intervention combining HL and CRC screening training for general practitioners (GPs) with a pictorial brochure and video targeting eligible patients, to increase CRC screening and other secondary outcomes, after 1 year, in several underserved geographic areas in France. Methods We will use a two-arm multicentric randomized controlled cluster trial with 32 GPs primarily serving underserved populations across four regions in France with 1024 patients recruited. GPs practicing in underserved areas (identified using the European Deprivation Index) will be block-randomized to: 1) a combined intervention (HL and CRC training + brochure and video for eligible patients), or 2) usual care. Patients will be included if they are between 50 and 74 years old, eligible for CRC screening, and present to recruited GPs. The primary outcome is CRC screening uptake after 1 year. Secondary outcomes include increasing knowledge and patient activation. After trial recruitment, we will conduct semi-structured interviews with up to 24 GPs (up to 8 in each region) and up to 48 patients (6 to 12 per region) based on data saturation. We will explore strategies that promote the intervention’s sustained use and rapid implementation using Normalization Process Theory. We will follow a community-based participatory research approach throughout the trial. For the analyses, we will adopt a regression framework for all quantitative data. We will also use exploratory mediation analyses. We will analyze all qualitative data using a framework analysis guided by Normalization Process Theory. Discussion Limited HL and its impact on the general population is a growing public health and policy challenge worldwide. It has received limited attention in France. A combined HL intervention could reduce disparities in CRC screening, increase screening rates among the most vulnerable populations, and increase knowledge and activation (beneficial in the context of repeated screening). Trial registration Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov. Trial registration number: 2020-A01687-32 . Date of registration: 17th November 2020.

Background DOLCE (Improving Decision making On Location of Care with the frail Elderly and their caregivers) was a post-intervention clustered randomised trial (cRT) to assess the effect of training home care teams on interprofessional shared decision-making (IP-SDM). Alongside the cRT, we sought to monitor healthcare providers’ level of behavioural intention to engage in an IP-SDM approach and to identify factors associated with this intention. Methods We conducted two cross-sectional surveys in the province of Quebec, Canada, one each at cRT entry and exit. Healthcare providers (e.g. nurses, occupational therapists and social workers) in the 16 participating intervention and control sites self-completed an identical paper-based questionnaire at entry and exit. Informed by the Integrated model for explaining healthcare professionals’ clinical behaviour by Godin et al. (2008), we assessed their behavioural intention to engage in IP-SDM to support older adults and caregivers of older adults with cognitive impairment to make health-related housing decisions. We also assessed psychosocial variables underlying their behavioural intention and collected sociodemographic data. We used descriptive statistics and linear mixed models to account for clustering. Results Between 2014 and 2016, 271 healthcare providers participated at study entry and 171 at exit. At entry, median intention level was 6 in a range of 1 (low) to 7 (high) (Interquartile range (IQR): 5–6.5) and factors associated with intention were social influence (β = 0.27, P  <  0.0001), beliefs about one’s capabilities (β = 0.43, P  <  0.0001), moral norm (β = 0.31, P  <  0.0001) and beliefs about consequences (β = 0.21, P  <  0.0001). At exit, median intention level was 5.5 (IQR: 4.5–6.5). Factors associated with intention were the same but did not include moral norm. However, at exit new factors were kept in the model: working in rehabilitation (β = − 0.39, P  = 0.018) and working as a technician (β = − 0.41, P  = 0.069) (compared to as a social worker). Conclusion Intention levels were high but decreased from entry to exit. Factors associated with intention also changed from study entry to study exit. These findings may be explained by the major restructuring of the health and social care system that took place during the 2 years of the study, leading to rapid staff turnover and organisational disturbance in home care teams. Future research should give more attention to contextual factors and design implementation interventions to withstand the disruption of system- and organisational-level disturbances. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT02244359 ). Registered on September 19th, 2014.