• Login
    View Item 
    •   ORKA Home
    • Conditions, Lifestyle Factors & Interventions
    • Conditions
    • Schizophrenia and Psychotic Disorders
    • View Item
    •   ORKA Home
    • Conditions, Lifestyle Factors & Interventions
    • Conditions
    • Schizophrenia and Psychotic Disorders
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Clinicians’ views of treatment types for first episode psychosis delivered in a randomised controlled trial (MAPS)

    Thumbnail
    Date
    2020-07
    Author
    Bird, Jessica C.
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Citation
    R.E. Byrne, J.C. Bird, S. Reeve, W. Jones, D. Shiers, A.P. Morrison, M. Pyle , S. Peters. Clinicians’ views of treatment types for first episode psychosis delivered in a randomised controlled trial (MAPS). EClinical medicine July 2020
    Abstract
    Background Clinicians’ treatment beliefs could affect the feasibility of delivering different treatments in a randomised controlled trial (RCT). In MAPS (Managing Adolescent first Episode Psychosis: a feasibility Study), adolescents with first episode psychosis (FEP) were randomly allocated to receive either antipsychotic medication (AP), psychological intervention (cognitive behavioural therapy [CBT] and family intervention [FI]), or both. We conducted a nested qualitative study to investigate clinicians’ views of these treatments. Methods Purposive sampling identified seventeen clinicians from CAMHS and Early Intervention services with prescribing responsibilities for 14-18 year olds at three participating MAPS sites. Individual participants were interviewed to examine their views of treatments in the MAPS trial. Interview transcripts were analysed using inductive Thematic Analysis. Findings Clinicians viewed the decision to refer adolescents to the MAPS trial as requiring careful clinical judgement. Assessment complexity and diagnostic uncertainty had to be balanced against the urgency for treatment to reduce risk and distress. Underlying influences including duty of care and treatment beliefs underpinned decisions. Clinicians consistently valued AP as the primary treatment for FEP, with CBT and/or FI seen as helpful secondary treatment options. Nevertheless, the potential harms of prescribing AP, or not, to such a young population were highlighted as being of concern in treatment decision-making, and fostered reluctance to refer into a RCT. Interpretation The design and delivery of RCTs involving young people experiencing FEP should consider the views of responsible clinicians, recognising that perceived treatment urgency, limitations in diagnostic precision, and existing treatment beliefs may influence trial processes.
    Description
    Open Access
    URI
    https://oxfordhealth-nhs.archive.knowledgearc.net/handle/123456789/571
    Published online at:
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100421
    Collections
    • Schizophrenia and Psychotic Disorders [116]

    Oxford Health copyright © 2019
    Contact Us | Send Feedback | JSPUI
    Powered by KnowledgeArc
     

     

    Browse

    All of ORKACommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsContributor DisciplineThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsContributor Discipline

    My Account

    Login

    Researcher Profiles

    Researchers

    Oxford Health copyright © 2019
    Contact Us | Send Feedback | JSPUI
    Powered by KnowledgeArc