Financial barriers and facilitators to secure firearm and medication storage among veterans with elevated suicide risk: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore financial barriers and facilitators to promoting secure firearm and medication storage among patients at risk for suicide. METHODS: Veterans seeking care in Veterans Affairs emergency care settings (N=28) participated in qualitative interviews on barriers and facilitators to adopting secure firearm and medication storage behaviours. Thematic analysis with inductive and iterative coding was used to identify themes pertaining to financial barriers and facilitators. Interviews were double-coded for reliability. RESULTS: We identified four themes-two related to financial barriers and two to financial facilitators. Barrier-related themes included: (1) the high cost of firearms and medications made owners less likely to dispose of medications, relinquish ownership of firearms or pursue out-of-home storage for firearms; (2) the high cost of out-of-home storage and preferred locking devices were barriers to secure storage. Facilitator-related themes included: (1) no-cost services or locking devices may help motivate secure firearm and medication storage and (2) preferences varied for no-cost locking devices versus coupons for devices. CONCLUSIONS: Addressing financial barriers and leveraging financial facilitators may motivate secure storage of lethal means, which could enhance suicide prevention efforts.

Contingency management for substance use disorders in the U.S. Veterans Health Administration: 2018-2022.

INTRODUCTION: Contingency management (CM) is one of the most effective interventions for substance use disorders (SUDs), including stimulant use disorder. In the United States, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) led the largest-scale rollout of CM in the US to date, but little is known about characteristics of patients treated and CM clinical practices. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we used VHA electronic health records data to descriptively examine CM treatment course (e.g., number of visits, time between visits, duration of treatment episode) and characteristics of patients receiving CM for SUDs from 2018 to 2022. RESULTS: From January 2018 to September 2022, 2844 patients received CM at 90 VA Health Systems (including 98 VA Medical Center, 7 community-based outpatient clinics, and 15 other sites). The median number of CM visits was 8 (mean = 10.17, SD = 8.12) visits over the course of 1.5 months (median = 45 days, mean = 57.46 days, SD = 62.65). The target substance was stimulants in 86.42 % of visits. Average age of patients was 52.29 years (SD = 12.10), with 55.06 % of patients experiencing homelessness or housing instability, and 97.50 % of patients diagnosed with more than one SUD. Compared to the year prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (03/2019-02/2020; mean = 957.33, SD = 157.71 visits/month), CM visits declined by 83.20 % in the year following the pandemic (03/2020-02/2021; mean = 160.83, SD = 164.14), and have yet to return to pre-pandemic levels. CONCLUSIONS: The CM rollout has been markedly successful in the VHA, with adoption across multiple VHA sites within a complex patient population, indicating the potential for effective, more widespread CM implementation. At the same time, there was a considerable reduction in CM care during the COVID-19 pandemic and CM has not yet returned to pre-pandemic levels. Moreover, only a small minority of VA patients with stimulant use disorder have received CM. Given increasing rates of overdose, including stimulant-involved overdose, it is important to increase CM provision in VHA and non-VHA settings.

Should contingency management protocols and dissemination practices be modified to accommodate rising stimulant use and harm reduction frameworks?

BACKGROUND: Stimulant-related overdoses have increased dramatically, with almost 50% of overdoses in the United States now involving stimulants. Additionally, harm-reduction approaches are increasingly seen as key to reducing the negative impact of substance use. Contingency management (CM), the provision of financial incentives for abstinence, is the most effective treatment for stimulant use disorder, but historically has not been widely implemented. Many recent, large-scale implementation efforts have relied upon foundational CM protocols that may not sufficiently account for recent increases in the prevalence and lethality of stimulant use nor the growing preference for harm reduction versus abstinence-only frameworks. ARGUMENT: We argue the need to (1) consider whether and how CM protocols might be modified to address rising stimulant use and harm reduction frameworks and (2) make CM widely accessible so that it can reduce population-level stimulant use while ensuring that it is delivered with fidelity to its basic principles. Proposed changes include changing CM reinforcement schedules to emphasize treatment engagement and reductions in use in addition to abstinence, changing guidelines on the duration of and re-engagement in CM, investing in research on virtual CM, incentivizing providers and health systems to deliver CM, making it easier to purchase and use point-of-care drug screens, using direct-to-consumer marketing to increase demand for CM and adapting CM to the community in which it is being implemented. CONCLUSIONS: Our proposed modifications to contingency management (CM) protocols and accessibility may more effectively address rising stimulant use and align CM more closely with harm-reduction frameworks. Given the urgent need to reduce overdose deaths, developing and testing modified CM protocols may need to rely upon methods other than randomized controlled trials. Efforts to disseminate CM widely to reduce population-level stimulant use must be balanced with the need to maintain fidelity to CM's basic principles.

Increasing the Acceptability of Lethal Means Safety Counseling for Firearms: Tips and Scripts.

In lethal means safety counseling (LMSC), clinicians encourage patients to limit their access to common and lethal means of suicide, especially firearms. However, previous studies have shown that clinicians may hesitate to deliver this evidence-based intervention, in part because of concerns that patients might not find such discussions acceptable. Based on a published review of 18 qualitative studies examining diverse perspectives on LMSC, we discuss strategies that may help clinicians increase the acceptability of LMSC among their patients and present supporting scripts, rationales, and resources. The studies included in the review examined the perspectives of clinicians, patients, firearm owners, and other relevant groups across a wide range of clinical settings on LMSC for firearms. The authors of these studies recommend that clinicians approach LMSC in a nonjudgmental manner with awareness of their own biases, demonstrate cultural competency by acknowledging the role of firearms in patients' lives, and adapt LMSC to patients' previous experiences with firearms, safety, and injury. Clinicians may also want to contextualize and provide a rationale for LMSC, decide whether or not to directly ask about access to firearms, and recommend a range of storage options tailored to the patient. Free locking devices or discount coupons for purchasing such devices may increase the acceptability and efficacy of these discussions. The strategies recommended in this paper are the first to be based on a comprehensive set of relevant studies. Future research is needed to examine whether these strategies do in fact increase the acceptability of LMSC and promote other outcomes such as increased feasibility and efficacy.

Impact of U.S. Federal Loan Repayment Programs on the Behavioral Health Workforce: Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVE: Federal loan repayment programs (LRPs) are one strategy to address the shortage of behavioral health providers. This scoping review aimed to identify and characterize the federal LRPs' impact on the U.S. behavioral health workforce. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted in accordance with JBI (formerly known as the Joanna Briggs Institute) methodology for scoping reviews. The authors searched the Ovid MEDLINE, Web of Science, APA PsycInfo, EconLit, PAIS Index, and Embase databases, and gray literature was also reviewed. Two coders screened each article's abstract and full text and extracted study data. Findings were narratively synthesized and conceptually organized. RESULTS: The full-text screening identified 17 articles that met eligibility criteria. Of these, eight were peer-reviewed studies, and all but one evaluated the National Health Service Corps (NHSC) LRP. Findings were conceptually organized into five categories: descriptive studies of NHSC behavioral health needs and the NHSC workforce (k=4); providers' perceptions of, and experiences with, the NHSC (k=2); associations between NHSC funding and the number of NHSC behavioral health providers (k=4); NHSC behavioral health workforce productivity and capacity (k=3); and federal LRP recruitment and retention (k=4). CONCLUSIONS: The literature on federal LRPs and their impact on the behavioral health workforce is relatively limited. Although federal LRPs are an important and effective tool to address the behavioral health workforce shortage, additional federal policy strategies are needed to attract and retain behavioral health providers and to diversify the behavioral health workforce.

Treating individuals with suicidal ideation in primary care: Patient-level characteristics associated with follow-up in the Collaborative Care Model.

INTRODUCTION: The Collaborative Care Model (CoCM) is an evidence-based approach which embeds behavioral health providers (BHPs) into primary care. Whether patients with suicidal ideation (SI) are willing to engage in CoCM is unclear. METHODS: Using Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) administrative data from primary care practices within an urban academic health system, we identified patients with and without SI who were referred to a CoCM BHP. We compared engagement, defined as attendance at ≥1 CoCM visit, across groups. RESULTS: Between 2018 and 2022, 7391 primary care patients were referred to a CoCM BHP. Eight hundred and ninety-two of these patients reported SI on the PHQ-9 (754 on "several days" during the previous 2 weeks and 138 on "more than half or most days"). Across groups, most patients engaged in CoCM. Patients reporting SI on several days engaged at a lower rate (61.4%) than those reporting SI on more than half or most days (65.9%). Both SI groups engaged at a lower rate than the 6499 patients who did not report SI (67.5%). CONCLUSION: Most patients referred to a CoCM BHP engaged in ≥1 visit. Rates were lower for patients with SI, with the lowest rate among those reporting SI on several days.

Freely Available Training Videos for Suicide Prevention: Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Freely available and asynchronous implementation supports can reduce the resource burden of evidence-based practice training to facilitate uptake. Freely available web-based training videos have proliferated, yet there have been no efforts to quantify their breadth, depth, and content for suicide prevention. OBJECTIVE: This study presents results from a scoping review of freely available training videos for suicide prevention and describes a methodological framework for reviewing such videos. METHODS: A scoping review of freely available training videos (≥2 minutes) for suicide prevention practices was conducted using 4 large video-sharing platforms: YouTube, Vimeo, Bing Video, and Google Video. Identified suicide prevention training videos (N=506) were reviewed and coded. RESULTS: Most content was targeted toward gatekeepers or other lay providers (n=370) versus clinical providers (n=136). Videos most commonly provided content related to suicidal thoughts or behaviors (n=420). Many videos (n=274, 54.2%) included content designed for certain communities or organizations. Less than half (n=232, 45.8%) of training videos included formal clinical content pertaining to assessment or intervention for suicide prevention. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggested an abundance of videos providing broad informational content (eg, "signs and symptoms of someone at risk for suicide") and a limited portion of videos with instructional content aimed at clinical providers delivering formal evidence-based assessments or interventions for suicide prevention. Development of resources to address identified gaps may be needed. Future work may leverage machine learning techniques to expedite the review process.

History and current status of contingency management programs in the Department of Veterans Affairs.

OBJECTIVE: This article describes the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) national implementation of contingency management within VA substance use disorder (SUD) treatment programs. METHODS: The rationale for implementing CM, role of VA leadership, and training and supervision procedures are detailed. The role of the Veterans Canteen Service (VCS) in sustaining the CM implementation through the donation of incentives is outlined. Updated outcomes from the primary program, CM to incentivize stimulant abstinence, are provided. Data presented were gathered from June 2011 to January 2023, from VA facilities across the country. RESULTS: More than 6000 Veterans from 119 VA facilities have received CM in a 12-week program in which two urine samples are obtained per week, with 92% of the samples negative for the targeted substance. Two other CM pilot projects are described. The first incentivizes adherence to injectable medications for opioid and alcohol use disorders, with over 580 veterans from 27 VA sites participating to date. The second incentivized smoking cessation in 312 patients from four sites. A new initiative in which CM is implemented in smaller community-based VA facilities through use of onsite prize cabinets is presented and the possibility of providing CM remotely in VA is discussed. CONCLUSIONS: It has proved feasible to implement abstinence CM and several other CM pilot programs at many VA facilities. Factors that contributed to the success of the VA CM rollout, challenges that were encountered along the way, and lessons learned that may facilitate wider use of CM outside VA are discussed.

Validity and reliability of in-person and remote oral fluids drug testing compared to urine drug testing.

BACKGROUND: Increased telehealth use has led to greater interest in remote drug testing. The speed, acceptability, and ability to observe oral fluids testing makes it the best candidate for remote drug testing, but its validity and reliability compared to gold-standard urine drug testing have not been established. METHODS: Veterans (N = 99) recruited from mental health clinics completed in-person and remote oral fluids testing and in-person urine drug testing. The validity of oral fluids versus urine drug testing and reliability of in-person versus remote oral fluids testing were evaluated. RESULTS: Validity of oral fluids testing was similar for samples collected in-person and virtually. Oral fluids testing had good specificity (0.93-1.00) and negative predictive value (0.85-1.00), but lower sensitivity and positive predictive value. Sensitivity (0.21-0.93) was highest for methadone and oxycodone, followed by cocaine and then amphetamine and opiates. Positive predictive value (0.14-1.00) was highest for cocaine, opiates, and methadone, followed by oxycodone and then amphetamine. Validity for cannabis was low, likely because of differences in detection windows for oral fluids versus urine drug screens. Reliability of remote oral fluids testing was adequate for opiates, cocaine, and methadone, but not oxycodone, amphetamine, or cannabis. CONCLUSIONS: Oral fluids testing identifies most negative, but not most positive, drug test results. While oral fluids testing is appropriate in some circumstances, its limitations should be acknowledged. Remote drug testing addresses many barriers, but also generates new barriers related to self-administration and remote interpretation. Limitations include a small sample and low base rates for some drugs.

The effectiveness of financial incentives for COVID-19 vaccination: A systematic review.

Financial incentives are a controversial strategy for increasing vaccination. In this systematic review, we evaluated: 1) the effects of incentives on COVID-19 vaccinations; 2) whether effects differed based on study outcome, study design, incentive type and timing, or sample sociodemographic characteristics; and 3) the cost of incentives per additional vaccine administered. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Econlit up to March 2022 for terms related to COVID, vaccines, and financial incentives, and identified 38 peer-reviewed, quantitative studies. Independent raters extracted study data and evaluated study quality. Studies examined the impact of financial incentives on COVID-19 vaccine uptake (k = 18), related psychological outcomes (e.g., vaccine intentions, k = 19), or both types of outcomes. For studies of vaccine uptake, none found that financial incentives had a negative effect on uptake, and most rigorous studies found that incentives had a positive effect on uptake. By contrast, studies of vaccine intentions were inconclusive. While three studies concluded that incentives may negatively impact vaccine intentions for some individuals, they had methodological limitations. Study outcomes (uptake versus intentions) and study design (experimental versus observational frameworks) appeared to influence results more than incentive type or timing. Additionally, income and political affiliation may moderate responses to incentives. Most studies evaluating cost per additional vaccine administered found that they ranged from $49-75. Overall, fears about financial incentives decreasing COVID-19 vaccine uptake are not supported by the evidence. Financial incentives likely increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake. While these increases appear to be small, they may be meaningful across populations. Registration: PROSPERO, CRD42022316086 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022316086).

Stakeholder perceptions of lethal means safety counseling: A qualitative systematic review.

Introduction: Lethal means safety counseling (LMSC) is an evidence-based suicide prevention intervention during which providers encourage patients to limit their access to lethal means (e.g., firearms, medications). Despite agreement about the importance of LMSC, it is underutilized in clinical practice. Methods: To better understand the individual and contextual factors that influence LMSC and its implementation, we conducted a systematic review of qualitative studies examining stakeholder perceptions of the intervention. PubMed and PsycInfo were searched up to February 2021 using terms related to: (1) LMSC, firearms, or medications; (2) suicide, safety, or injury; and (3) qualitative methodology. Two coders used thematic synthesis to analyze findings from eligible papers, including developing a codebook and coding using an inductive and iterative approach (reliability k > 0.70). Confidence in review findings were evaluated using the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (CERQual) Approach. Subthemes were assigned to domains in the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Findings: Of the 19 papers identified, 18 discussed LMSC for firearms and 1 focused exclusively on LMSC for medications. The firearm-related studies explored perspectives of a variety of stakeholders (patients, providers, members of the firearms community, healthcare leaders, and family members) across multiple settings (emergency departments, pediatric and adult primary care, and outpatient mental health). Seven overarching themes emerged, including the: (1) importance of firearms to owners' identities and perceptions of ownership as a value and right, which can lead to perceived cultural tensions in clinical settings; (2) importance of patients understanding the context and rationale for LMSC; (3) value of providers showing cultural competency when discussing firearms; (4) influence of safety and risk beliefs on firearm behaviors; (5) need to navigate logistical concerns when implementing LMSC; (6) value of individualizing LMSC; (7) potential for trusted family members and friends to be involved in implementing LMSC. Conclusion: This synthesis of the qualitative literature informs clinical, operational, and research endeavors aimed at increasing the reach and effectiveness of LMSC. Future research should address the perspectives of individuals underrepresented in the literature (e.g., those from racial/ethnic minority groups) and further examine stakeholders' perceptions of LMSC for medication. [-2pt]. Systematic review registration: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021237515], identifier [CRD42021237515].

How well do Cognitive Behavioural Therapy and Behavioural Activation for depression repair anhedonia? A secondary analysis of the COBRA randomized controlled trial.

A secondary analysis of the COBRA randomized controlled trial was conducted to examine how well Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) and Behavioural Activation (BA) repair anhedonia. Patients with current major depressive disorder (N = 440) were randomized to receive BA or CBT, and anhedonia and depression outcomes were measured after acute treatment (six months) and at two further follow up intervals (12 and 18 months). Anhedonia was assessed using the Snaith Hamilton Pleasure Scale (SHAPS; a measure of consummatory pleasure). Both CBT and BA led to significant improvements in anhedonia during acute treatment, with no significant difference between treatments. Participants remained above healthy population averages of anhedonia at six months, and there was no further significant improvement in anhedonia at 12-month or 18-month follow up. Greater baseline anhedonia severity predicted reduced repair of depression symptoms and fewer depression-free days across the follow-up period in both the BA and CBT arms. The extent of anhedonia repair was less marked than the extent of depression repair across both treatment arms. These findings demonstrate that CBT and BA are similarly and only partially effective in treating anhedonia. Therefore, both therapies should be further refined or novel treatments should be developed in order better to treat anhedonia.

Leveraging behavioral economics and implementation science to engage patients at risk for suicide in mental health treatment: a pilot study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Primary care is an ideal setting to connect individuals at risk for suicide to follow-up care; however, only half of the patients referred from the primary care attend an initial mental health visit. We aim to develop acceptable, feasible, low-cost, and effective new strategies to increase treatment initiation among at-risk individuals identified in primary care. METHODS: We will conduct a multi-phase, mixed-methods study. First, we will conduct a chart review study by using administrative data, including medical records, to identify characteristics of primary care patients at risk for suicide who do or do not attend an initial mental health visit following a referral. Second, we will conduct a mixed methods study by using direct observations and qualitative interviews with key stakeholders (N = 65) to understand barriers and facilitators to mental health service initiation among at-risk individuals. Stakeholders will include patients with suicidal ideation referred from primary care who do and do not attend a first mental health visit, primary care and behavioral health providers, and individuals involved in the referral process. We also will collect preliminary self-report and behavioral data regarding potential mechanisms of behavior change (i.e., self-regulation and social support) from patients. Third, we will leverage these findings, relevant frameworks, and the extant literature to conduct a multi-arm, non-randomized feasibility trial. During this trial, we will rapidly prototype and test strategies to support attendance at initial mental health visits. Strategies will be developed with subject matter experts (N = 10) and iteratively pilot tested (~5 patients per strategy) and refined. Research will be completed in the Penn Integrated Care Program (PIC), which includes fourteen primary care clinics in Philadelphia that provide infrastructure for electronic referrals, patient communication, and data access. DISCUSSION: We will leverage frameworks and methods from behavioral economics and implementation science to develop strategies to increase mental health treatment initiation among individuals at risk for suicide identified in primary care. This project will lead to an evaluation of these strategies in a fully powered randomized trial and contribute to improvements in access to and engagement in mental health services for individuals at risk for suicide. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05021224.

Do financial incentives increase mental health treatment engagement? A meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Engagement in mental health treatment is low, which can lead to poor outcomes. We evaluated the efficacy of offering patients financial incentives to increase their mental health treatment engagement, also referred to as contingency management. METHOD: We meta-analyzed studies offering financial incentives for mental health treatment engagement, including increasing treatment attendance, medication adherence, and treatment goal completion. Analyses were run within a multilevel framework. All study designs were included, and sensitivity analyses were run including only randomized and high-quality studies. RESULTS: About 80% of interventions incentivized treatment for substance use disorders. Financial incentives significantly increased treatment attendance (Hedges' g = 0.49, [0.33, 0.64], k = 30, I2 = 83.14), medication adherence (Hedges' g = 0.95, [0.47, 1.44], k = 6, I2 = 87.73), and treatment goal completion (Hedges' g = 0.61, [0.22, 0.99], k = 5, I2 = 60.55), including completing homework, signing treatment plans, and reducing problematic behavior. CONCLUSIONS: Financial incentives increase treatment engagement with medium to large effect sizes. We provide strong evidence for their effectiveness in increasing substance use treatment engagement and preliminary evidence for their effectiveness in increasing treatment engagement for other mental health disorders. Future research should prioritize testing the efficacy of incentivizing treatment engagement for mental health disorders aside from substance use. Research must also identify ways to incentivize treatment engagement that improve functioning and long-term outcomes and address ethical and systemic barriers to implementing these interventions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Palliative Care and Documented Suicide: Association Among Veterans With High Mortality Risk.

CONTEXT: Palliative care consultations (PCCs) are associated with reduced physical and psychological symptoms that are related to suicide risk. Little is known, however, about the association between PCCs and death from suicide among patients at high risk of short-term mortality. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between the number of PCCs and documentation of suicide in a cohort of Veterans at high risk of short-term mortality, before and after accounting for Veterans' sociodemographic characteristics and clinical conditions. METHODS: An observational cohort study was conducted using linked Veterans Affairs clinical and administrative databases for 580,620 decedents with high risk of one-year mortality. Logistic regression models were used to examine the association between number of PCCs and documentation of suicide. RESULTS: Higher percentages of Veterans who died by suicide were diagnosed with chronic pulmonary disease as well as mental health/substance use conditions compared with Veterans who died from other causes. In adjusted models, one PCC in the 90 days prior to death was significantly associated with a 71% decrease in the odds of suicide (OR = 0.29, 95% CI = 0.23-0.37, P < 0.001) and two or more PCCs were associated with a 78% decrease (OR = 0.22, 95% CI = 0.15-0.33, P < 0.001). Associated "number needed to be exposed" estimates suggest that 421 Veterans in this population would need to receive at least one PCC to prevent one suicide. CONCLUSION: While acknowledging the importance of specialized mental health care in reducing suicide among high-risk patients, interventions delivered in the context of PCCs may also play a role.

Suicide and Telehealth Treatments: A PRISMA Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: This PRISMA scoping review explored worldwide research on the delivery of suicide-specific interventions through an exclusive telehealth modality. Research over telehealth modalities with suicidal individuals highlights the importance of facilitating participants' access to treatments despite location and circumstances (e.g., rural, expenses related to appointments, etc.). AIM: The review sought evidence of outcomes of trials or projects in which both the patient and therapist attended sessions conjointly and openly discussed suicide over a telehealth modality (e.g., phone, zoom). METHOD: To explore this topic the authors searched for research trials and quality improvement projects using Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, Ovid PsycINFO, EBSCO Social Services Abstracts, and Web of Science on 3/3/2021. RESULTS: Nine different articles were included that each spanned distinct treatments, with eight being research studies and one being a quality improvement project. LIMITATIONS: Publications featuring ongoing or upcoming research in which complete study results were not available did not meet inclusion criteria for this review. CONCLUSION: Several important research gaps were identified. While this approach has been largely understudied, exclusive telehealth delivery of suicide-specific interventions has great potential for the prevention of suicidality, especially in the era of COVID-19 and beyond.

Addressing anhedonia to increase depression treatment engagement.

Anhedonia, or reward system dysfunction, is associated with poorer treatment outcomes among depressed individuals. The role of anhedonia in treatment engagement, however, has not yet been explored. We review research on components of reward functioning impaired in depression, including effort valuation, reward anticipation, initial responsiveness, reward learning, reward probability, and reward delay, highlighting potential barriers to treatment engagement associated with these components. We then propose interventions to improve treatment initiation and continuation by addressing deficits in each component of reward functioning, focusing on modifications of existing evidence-based interventions to meet the needs of individuals with heightened anhedonia. We describe potential settings for these interventions and times at which they can be delivered during the process of referring individuals to mental health treatment, conducting intakes or assessments, and providing treatment. Additionally, we note the advantages of using screening processes already in place in primary care, workplace, school, and online settings to identify individuals with heightened anhedonia who may benefit from these interventions. We conclude with suggestions for future research on the impact of anhedonia on treatment engagement and the efficacy of interventions to address it. PRACTITIONER POINTS: Many depressed individuals who might benefit from treatment do not initiate it or discontinue early. One barrier to treatment engagement may be anhedonia, a core symptom of depression characterized by loss of interest or pleasure in usual activities. We describe brief interventions to improve treatment engagement in individuals with anhedonia that can be implemented during the referral process or early in treatment. We argue that interventions aiming to improve treatment engagement in depressed individuals that target anhedonia may be particularly effective.

Increasing the Impact of Interventions Incentivizing Psychiatric Treatment Engagement: Challenges and Opportunities.

Individuals with psychiatric disorders often struggle to initiate and engage in treatment. Financial incentives improve treatment engagement, including treatment attendance, medication adherence, and abstinence from substance use. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) recently made the first large-scale, successful effort to implement incentive-based interventions in substance use disorder treatment. Health care systems, including the VA, can increase the impact of these interventions by extending them to target a range of psychiatric disorders, adapting them for specific clinical contexts, using insights from behavioral economics, and partnering with corporations to fund incentives and implement interventions.

Adding cognitive therapy to antidepressant medications decreases suicidal ideation.

BACKGROUND: Psychotherapy for depression and antidepressant medications have both been associated with decreases in suicidal ideation. Studies have not examined whether adding psychotherapy to antidepressant medications further reduces suicidal ideation relative to medications alone in adults. METHODS: Participants (N = 452) were randomized to 7 months of treatment with antidepressant medications or combined treatment with both medications and cognitive therapy for depression. We examined change in the suicide items from the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) across treatment using Bayesian generalized linear mixed models for non-continuous outcomes. RESULTS: Suicidal ideation decreased across treatment. When measured with the BDI, participants receiving both cognitive therapy and antidepressant medications showed 17% greater reductions in suicidal ideation relative to those receiving medications alone; this effect remained significant when controlling for depression severity. While the same pattern was observed when suicidal ideation was measured with the HDRS, the effect was smaller (7%) and not statistically significant. When BDI and HDRS scores were combined, participants receiving both therapy and medications showed 9% greater reductions in suicidal ideation relative to those receiving medications alone; this effect was marginally significant when controlling for depression severity. LIMITATIONS: This is a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial designed to treat depression, in which suicidal ideation was assessed using single-item measures. CONCLUSIONS: Adding cognitive therapy to antidepressant medications may reduce suicidal ideation to a greater extent than medications alone. Pending replication, combination treatment may be preferred for individuals with suicidal ideation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00057577.