Coping with Unusual ExperienceS for 12-18 year olds (CUES+): a transdiagnostic randomised controlled trial of the effectiveness of cognitive therapy in reducing distress associated with unusual experiences in adolescent mental health services: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Childhood 'unusual experiences' (such as hearing voices that others cannot, or suspicions of being followed) are common, but can become more distressing during adolescence, especially for young people in contact with Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS). Unusual experiences that are distressing or have adverse life impact (UEDs) are associated with a range of current and future emotional, behavioural and mental health difficulties. Recommendations for psychological intervention are based on evidence from adult studies, with some support from small, pilot, child-specific evaluations. Research is needed to ensure that the recommendations suit children as well as adults. The CUES+ study (Coping with Unusual ExperienceS for 12-18 year olds) aims to find out whether cognitive behaviour therapy for UEDs (CBT-UED) is a helpful and cost-effective addition to usual community care for 12-18 year olds presenting to United Kingdom National Health Service Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services in four London boroughs. METHODS: The CUES+ study is a randomised controlled trial comparing CBT-UED plus routine care to routine care alone. CBT-UED comprises up to 16 sessions, including up to 12 individual and up to four family support meetings, each lasting around 45-60 min, delivered weekly. The primary outcome is emotional distress. Secondary outcomes are change in UEDs, risk events (self-harm, attendance at emergency services, other adverse events) and health economic outcomes. Participants will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio after baseline assessment. Randomisation will be stratified by borough and by severity of mental health presentation: 'severe' (an identified psychotic or bipolar disorder) or any 'other' condition. Outcomes will be assessed by a trained assessor blind to treatment condition at 0, 16 and 24 weeks. Recruitment began in February, 2015 and is ongoing until the end of March, 2017. DISCUSSION: The CUES+ study will contribute to the currently limited child-specific evidence base for psychological interventions for UEDs occurring in the context of psychosis or any other mental health presentation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials, ID: ISRCTN21802136 . Prospectively registered on 12 January 2015. Protocol V3 31 August 2015 with screening amended.

Outcome of Intensive Cognitive Behaviour Therapy in a Residential Setting for People with Severe Obsessive Compulsive Disorder: A Large Open Case Series.

BACKGROUND: There is little data to inform the treatment of severe obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) in an inpatient or residential setting. AIMS: This paper aimed to: a) describe treatment outcomes at a residential unit over 11 years; b) investigate whether treatment was successful for a subset of severe treatment refractory residents; c) compare an intensive treatment programme to a "standard" treatment programme; and d) find predictors of self or early discharge from the unit. METHOD: We compared treatment outcomes for (i) a minimum 12-week treatment (hereafter "standard") programme versus a 2-week intensive programme and (ii) for severe treatment refractory cases on the standard programme. We identified 472 residents with OCD admitted to the Anxiety Disorders Residential Unit at the Bethlem Royal Hospital between 2001 and 2012. Outcomes were measured with the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS), Obsessive Compulsive Inventory (OCI), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) obtained throughout treatment and up to one year after discharge. RESULTS: Although residents had very severe OCD on admission, sequential assessment with the Y-BOCS, OCI, BAI and BDI demonstrated that scores on all outcome measures significantly decreased from pre to posttreatment and were generally maintained at follow-up. There was no significant difference between those on the standard or the 2-week intensive programme. Sixty-nine per cent of residents with OCD made significant improvements, with at least a 25% reduction on the Y-BOCS. There were predictors of self or early discharge but none for outcome on the Y-BOCS. CONCLUSIONS: The data support the principle of stepped care for severe OCD.