Explore the vast range of titles available.

ObjectivesPatient’s and therapist’s expectations are considered an important factor influencing placebo response in experimental and therapeutic settings. Nevertheless, the placebo effects of common neurological facilitators that promote treatment efficacy have not been explored. In the present study we examined the estimations of patients, therapists, and staff members, regarding their treatment type and assessed their influence on the facilitating effects of oxytocin.MethodsPatients (N = 87) were randomized and double-blindly allocated to receive either oxytocin or placebo, twice daily for a period of four weeks, as part of a larger randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patient’s, therapist’s and staff’s expectations were assessed based on their estimation of treatment type (agent or placebo). Multilevel modeling and univariate and multivariate regression analysis were performed to assess the effects of patient’s, therapist’s, and staff’s estimations on treatment outcome beyond the effects of treatment type.ResultsStaff’s, therapist’s, and patient’s estimations were significantly associated with treatment outcomes. Nevertheless, only therapist’s and patient’s estimations significantly predicted improvement beyond actual administration, with therapist’s and patient’s estimations associated with improvement in trait anxiety (STAI-T, B=-1.80, p < .05, and B=-2.02, p < .05, respectively); therapist’s estimations were associated with improvement in general distress (OQ-45, B=-3.71, p < .05), and patient’s estimations were associated with symptom relief (HSCL-11, B=-0.13, p < .05). Overall, patient’s estimations had a higher relative contribution to treatment success, with standardized coefficients across scales ranging from − 0.06 to -0.26.ConclusionsThe neurobiological factors that promote treatment success are also influenced by patient’s and therapist’s expectations. Future studies should consider these effects when examining their impact in inpatient settings.

Attempted suicide is the main risk factor for suicide and repeated suicide attempts. However, the evidence for follow-up treatments reducing suicidal behavior in these patients is limited. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of the Attempted Suicide Short Intervention Program (ASSIP) in reducing suicidal behavior. ASSIP is a novel brief therapy based on a patient-centered model of suicidal behavior, with an emphasis on early therapeutic alliance. Patients who had recently attempted suicide were randomly allocated to treatment as usual (n = 60) or treatment as usual plus ASSIP (n = 60). ASSIP participants received three therapy sessions followed by regular contact through personalized letters over 24 months. Participants considered to be at high risk of suicide were included, 63% were diagnosed with an affective disorder, and 50% had a history of prior suicide attempts. Clinical exclusion criteria were habitual self-harm, serious cognitive impairment, and psychotic disorder. Study participants completed a set of psychosocial and clinical questionnaires every 6 months over a 24-month follow-up period. The study represents a real-world clinical setting at an outpatient clinic of a university hospital of psychiatry. The primary outcome measure was repeat suicide attempts during the 24-month follow-up period. Secondary outcome measures were suicidal ideation, depression, and health-care utilization. Furthermore, effects of prior suicide attempts, depression at baseline, diagnosis, and therapeutic alliance on outcome were investigated. During the 24-month follow-up period, five repeat suicide attempts were recorded in the ASSIP group and 41 attempts in the control group. The rates of participants reattempting suicide at least once were 8.3% (n = 5) and 26.7% (n = 16). ASSIP was associated with an approximately 80% reduced risk of participants making at least one repeat suicide attempt (Wald χ21 = 13.1, 95% CI 12.4-13.7, p < 0.001). ASSIP participants spent 72% fewer days in the hospital during follow-up (ASSIP: 29 d; control group: 105 d; W = 94.5, p = 0.038). Higher scores of patient-rated therapeutic alliance in the ASSIP group were associated with a lower rate of repeat suicide attempts. Prior suicide attempts, depression, and a diagnosis of personality disorder at baseline did not significantly affect outcome. Participants with a diagnosis of borderline personality disorder (n = 20) had more previous suicide attempts and a higher number of reattempts. Key study limitations were missing data and dropout rates. Although both were generally low, they increased during follow-up. At 24 months, the group difference in dropout rate was significant: ASSIP, 7% (n = 4); control, 22% (n = 13). A further limitation is that we do not have detailed information of the co-active follow-up treatment apart from participant self-reports every 6 months on the setting and the duration of the co-active treatment. ASSIP, a manual-based brief therapy for patients who have recently attempted suicide, administered in addition to the usual clinical treatment, was efficacious in reducing suicidal behavior in a real-world clinical setting. ASSIP fulfills the need for an easy-to-administer low-cost intervention. Large pragmatic trials will be needed to conclusively establish the efficacy of ASSIP and replicate our findings in other clinical settings. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02505373.

Test anxiety is a common issue among college students, which can affect their physical and psychological health. However, effective interventions or therapeutic strategies are still lacking. This study aims to evaluate the potential effects of JYLP-326 on test anxious college students. Sixty anxious students were enrolled and randomly allocated to the placebo group and the probiotic group. Both groups were instructed to take placebo and JYLP-326 products twice per day for three weeks, respectively. Thirty unanxious students with no treatments were assigned to a regular control group. The anxiety, depression, and insomnia questionnaires were used to measure students' mental states at the baseline and the end of this study. 16S rRNA sequencing and untargeted metabolomics were performed to analyze the changes in the gut microbiota and fecal metabolism. The questionnaire results suggested that JYLP-326 administration could relieve the symptoms of anxiety, depression, and insomnia in test anxious students. The gut microbiomes of the placebo group showed a significantly greater diversity index than the control group (p < 0.05). An increased abundance of and at the genus level was observed in the placebo group, and the relative abundance of and decreased. Whereas, JYLP-326 administration could partly restore the disturbed gut microbiota. Additionally, test anxiety was correlated with disordered fecal metabolomics such as a higher Ethyl sulfate and a lower Cyclohexylamine, which could be reversed after taking JYLP-326. Furthermore, the changed microbiota and fecal metabolites were significantly associated with anxiety-related symptoms. The results indicate that the intervention of JYLP-326 could be an effective strategy to alleviate anxiety, depression, and insomnia in test anxious college students. The potential mechanism underlying this effect could be related to the regulation of gut microbiota and fecal metabolites.

High resource expenditure on acute care is a challenge for mental health services aiming to focus on supporting recovery, and relapse after an acute crisis episode is common. Some evidence supports self-management interventions to prevent such relapses, but their effect on readmissions to acute care following a crisis is untested. We tested whether a self-management intervention facilitated by peer support workers could reduce rates of readmission to acute care for people discharged from crisis resolution teams, which provide intensive home treatment following a crisis. We did a randomised controlled superiority trial recruiting participants from six crisis resolution teams in England. Eligible participants had been on crisis resolution team caseloads for at least a week, and had capacity to give informed consent. Participants were randomly assigned to intervention and control groups by an unmasked data manager. Those collecting and analysing data were masked to allocation, but participants were not. Participants in the intervention group were offered up to ten sessions with a peer support worker who supported them in completing a personal recovery workbook, including formulation of personal recovery goals and crisis plans. The control group received the personal recovery workbook by post. The primary outcome was readmission to acute care within 1 year. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number 01027104. 221 participants were assigned to the intervention group versus 220 to the control group; primary outcome data were obtained for 218 versus 216. 64 (29%) of 218 participants in the intervention versus 83 (38%) of 216 in the control group were readmitted to acute care within 1 year (odds ratio 0·66, 95% CI 0·43–0·99; p=0·0438). 71 serious adverse events were identified in the trial (29 in the treatment group; 42 in the control group). Our findings suggest that peer-delivered self-management reduces readmission to acute care, although admission rates were lower than anticipated and confidence intervals were relatively wide. The complexity of the study intervention limits interpretability, but assessment is warranted of whether implementing this intervention in routine settings reduces acute care readmission. National Institute for Health Research.

To provide recommendations for the selection of comparators for randomized controlled trials of health-related behavioral interventions. The National Institutes of Health Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research convened an expert panel to critically review the literature on control or comparison groups for behavioral trials and to develop strategies for improving comparator choices and for resolving controversies and disagreements about comparators. The panel developed a Pragmatic Model for Comparator Selection in Health-Related Behavioral Trials. The model indicates that the optimal comparator is the one that best serves the primary purpose of the trial but that the optimal comparator's limitations and barriers to its use must also be taken into account. We developed best practice recommendations for the selection of comparators for health-related behavioral trials. Use of the Pragmatic Model for Comparator Selection in Health-Related Behavioral Trials can improve the comparator selection process and help resolve disagreements about comparator choices.