このページは自動翻訳されたものであり、翻訳の正確性は保証されていません。を参照してください。 英語版 ソーステキスト用。

Cognitive Remediation Therapy Within a Secure Forensic Setting

2017年7月24日 更新者:Ken O'Reilly、Central Mental Hospital

Randomised Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy of Cognitive Remediation Within a Secure Forensic Setting for Schizophrenia Spectrum Patients

This clinical trial tests the feasibility, effectiveness and patient satisfaction with cognitive remediation therapy for patients diagnosed with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder within a forensic hospital. It is hypothesised that patients receiving cognitive remediation therapy will have an improvement in cognitive performance, real world functioning, symptoms, violence risk and benefit more from additional psychosocial treatment programmes over time relative to patients receiving treatment as usual. Furthermore it is hypothesised that it will be feasible to carry out such a study and that patients will report high rates of satisfaction with cognitive remediation therapy. Finally it is hypothesised that differences on the effectiveness measures will be maintained at 6 month follow up after the end of treatment.

調査の概要

詳細な説明

This is a single centre randomised clinical trial to evaluate the feasibility, effectiveness and patient satisfaction with cognitive remediation therapy within a secure forensic setting for patients diagnosed with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.

The feasibility of the intervention will be assessed using key indicators such as rate of enrolment, retention of patients in the trial, blinding effectiveness, and completion rate of the primary outcome measure. The effectiveness of the intervention will be assessed using the MATRICS consensus cognitive battery, symptoms (PANSS and CAINS) and real world functioning (SOFAS: Social and occupational functioning assessment scale). The effect of cognitive remediation on violence risk (HCR-20), programme completion and recovery (Dundrum 3 & 4) will also be examined, where programme completion is a measure of attainments from participating in additional psychosocial interventions and recovery is a measure of stability of mental state.

Patient satisfaction with cognitive remediation therapy will be assessed using a consumer constructed interview developed by Rose et al (2008) and administered by a social worker not involved in the delivery of cognitive remediation.

The trial will take place at the Republic of Ireland's Central Mental Hospital (CMH). The CMH is the only secure forensic psychiatric hospital for the Republic of Ireland, a population of 4.6 million. CMH provides specialised care for adults who have a mental disorder and are at risk of harming themselves or others.

After a baseline assessment to ensure eligibility and to obtain consent, an estimated 60 patients will be randomised to receive fourteen weeks of cognitive remediation versus treatment as usual. Patients who receive treatment as usual will be offered cognitive remediation upon completion of the study. Patients allocated to cognitive remediation will receive three individual sessions of cognitive remediation a week and one group session, fifty-six sessions in total The focus of the group session is to normalise cognitive difficulties that patients may be experiencing, to receive support and to help generalise gains. The primary outcome measure the MATRICS composite score and secondary outcome measures to assess real world functioning, symptoms, violence risk, programme completion and recovery will be administered at baseline, the end of treatment and at six month follow up. Secondary measures will also include feasibility outcomes and patient satisfaction with cognitive remediation therapy. All evaluators of the effectiveness measures will be blind to participant treatment condition at the time of assessment.

The cognitive remediation therapy is a principle driven intervention consisting of nine treatment principles: Principle 1 refers to relationship building, Principle 2 refers to collaborative goal setting, Principle 3 involves the session structure, Principle 4 concerns the content of the sessions, Principle 5, concerns the pacing of sessions, Principle 6 involves scaffolding and errorless learning, Principle 7 refers to meta-cognitive strategies, Principle 8 involves generalisation of gains, finally Principle 9 refers to managing ambivalence. The actual therapy will involve the use of a combination on pen, paper and computerised materials to stimulate patient's cognitive capacity and to provide them with the opportunity to apply meta-cognitive strategies.

The investigators hypothesise that it is feasible to carry out a randomised controlled trial within a single centre forensic setting and that patients will report high rates of satisfaction with cognitive remediation. It is also hypothesised that patients receiving cognitive remediation therapy will have an improvement in cognitive performance (the primary outcome measure), real world functioning, symptoms and violence risk over time relative to patients receiving treatment as usual; specifically that there will be a treatment by time interaction. Furthermore it is hypothesised that these differences will be maintained at six month follow up after the end of treatment.

In addition it is hypothesised that patients receiving cognitive remediation will show an improvement over time on the Dundrum programme completion and recovery scales compared to those receiving treatment as usual.

While meta-analytic reviews have demonstrated that cognitive remediation therapy has a beneficial effect on the cognitive deficits experienced by patients with schizophrenia (Wykes et al 2011), to the best of our knowledge there has been no study with forensic mental health patients. The current study will help answer whether it is feasible to deliver cognitive remediation within a forensic mental health setting and whether it is acceptable to patients. The study aims to contribute to the evidence base for psychological interventions within a forensic setting and to answer the question as to whether cognitive remediation has a beneficial effect and if it does whether this effect is maintained over time.

研究の種類

介入

入学 (実際)

65

段階

  • 適用できない

連絡先と場所

このセクションには、調査を実施する担当者の連絡先の詳細と、この調査が実施されている場所に関する情報が記載されています。

研究場所

参加基準

研究者は、適格基準と呼ばれる特定の説明に適合する人を探します。これらの基準のいくつかの例は、人の一般的な健康状態または以前の治療です。

適格基準

就学可能な年齢

18年~65年 (大人、高齢者)

健康ボランティアの受け入れ

いいえ

受講資格のある性別

全て

説明

Inclusion Criteria:

  • A Structured Clinical Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual IV (SCID) diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Acutely psychotic, or judged too dangerous to participate in treatment, or being over 65 years of age.

研究計画

このセクションでは、研究がどのように設計され、研究が何を測定しているかなど、研究計画の詳細を提供します。

研究はどのように設計されていますか?

デザインの詳細

  • 主な目的:処理
  • 割り当て:ランダム化
  • 介入モデル:並列代入
  • マスキング:独身

武器と介入

参加者グループ / アーム
介入・治療
実験的:Cognitive Remediation Therapy
Principle driven cognitive remediation therapy, cognitive rehabilitation, cognitive training, cognitive enhancement.
Fifty-six sessions of principle driven cognitive remediation therapy. Three individual sessions and one group session each week for approximately fourteen weeks.
他の名前:
  • 認知トレーニング
  • 認知機能の向上
  • 認知リハビリテーション
アクティブコンパレータ:Treatment as Usual
Usual care.
Keep getting usual care.
他の名前:
  • 標準ケア

この研究は何を測定していますか?

主要な結果の測定

結果測定
メジャーの説明
時間枠
The MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery (MCCB)
時間枠:Group by time interaction: changes from baseline, to end of treatment (average 5 months)
Consensus neuropsychological assessment battery for cognitive deficits in schizophrenia
Group by time interaction: changes from baseline, to end of treatment (average 5 months)

二次結果の測定

結果測定
メジャーの説明
時間枠
Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale (SOFAS)
時間枠:Group by time interaction: changes from baseline, to end of treatment (average 5 months)
100 item rating scale for measuring real world functioning independent of symptoms
Group by time interaction: changes from baseline, to end of treatment (average 5 months)
Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (negative and disorganized factors)
時間枠:Group by time interaction: changes from baseline, to end of treatment (average 5 months)
Rating scale for assessing psychiatric symptoms associated with schizophrenia
Group by time interaction: changes from baseline, to end of treatment (average 5 months)
Clinical Assessment Interview for Negative Symptoms (CAINS)
時間枠:Group by time interaction: changes from baseline, to end of treatment (average 5 months)
Rating scale for assessing the negative symptoms of schizophrenia
Group by time interaction: changes from baseline, to end of treatment (average 5 months)

その他の成果指標

結果測定
メジャーの説明
時間枠
Historical Clinical and Risk Management -20 (HCR-20)
時間枠:Group by time interaction: changes from baseline, to 12 months
Rating scale for assessing violence risk
Group by time interaction: changes from baseline, to 12 months
Dundrum Toolkit: Programme Completion and Recovery Scales
時間枠:Group by time interaction: changes from baseline to 12 months
Rating scale for assessing progress and recovery within a forensic mental health setting
Group by time interaction: changes from baseline to 12 months
Patient satisfaction.
時間枠:Average 5 months.
Consumer developed interview exploring patient satisfaction with cognitive remediation.
Average 5 months.
Feasibility outcome: rate of enrolment.
時間枠:12 months.
Willingness of forensic mental health patients to participate in study.
12 months.
Feasibility outcome: rate of retention.
時間枠:12 months.
Number of patients who complete the intervention.
12 months.
Feasibility outcome: blinding.
時間枠:12 months.
Number of patients in which the blind is broken compared to number of patients in the study.
12 months.
Completion rate of primary outcome measures
時間枠:12 months.
Number of successfully completed primary outcome measures.
12 months.

協力者と研究者

ここでは、この調査に関係する人々や組織を見つけることができます。

スポンサー

捜査官

  • スタディディレクター:Professor Harry G Kennedy, M.D.、Central Mental Hospital and Department of Psychiatry, Trinity College Dublin.
  • スタディディレクター:Professor Gary Donohoe, Ph.D.、Department of Psychiatry, Trinity College Dublin.
  • 主任研究者:Dr. Ken W O'Reilly, D.Psych.Sc.、Central Mental Hospital and Department of Psychiatry, Trinity College Dublin.

出版物と役立つリンク

研究に関する情報を入力する責任者は、自発的にこれらの出版物を提供します。これらは、研究に関連するあらゆるものに関するものである可能性があります。

一般刊行物

研究記録日

これらの日付は、ClinicalTrials.gov への研究記録と要約結果の提出の進捗状況を追跡します。研究記録と報告された結果は、国立医学図書館 (NLM) によって審査され、公開 Web サイトに掲載される前に、特定の品質管理基準を満たしていることが確認されます。

主要日程の研究

研究開始

2014年8月1日

一次修了 (実際)

2017年1月1日

研究の完了 (実際)

2017年1月1日

試験登録日

最初に提出

2015年2月4日

QC基準を満たした最初の提出物

2015年2月10日

最初の投稿 (見積もり)

2015年2月11日

学習記録の更新

投稿された最後の更新 (実際)

2017年7月25日

QC基準を満たした最後の更新が送信されました

2017年7月24日

最終確認日

2017年7月1日

詳しくは

この情報は、Web サイト clinicaltrials.gov から変更なしで直接取得したものです。研究の詳細を変更、削除、または更新するリクエストがある場合は、register@clinicaltrials.gov。 までご連絡ください。 clinicaltrials.gov に変更が加えられるとすぐに、ウェブサイトでも自動的に更新されます。

購読する