Background: DIALOG+ was developed as a computer-mediated intervention, consisting of a structured assessment of patients' concerns combined with a solution-focused approach to initiate change. This study tested the effectiveness of DIALOG+ in the community treatment of patients with psychosis. Method: This was a pragmatic, exploratory, parallel-group, cluster-randomised controlled trial. Clinicians within community teams - along with patients with psychosis under their care - were randomised to use DIALOG+ once per month for 6 months or an active control. The primary outcome (subjective quality of life, SQOL) and secondary outcomes were assessed after 3, 6 and 12 months by blinded assessors and analysed using mixed-effect models. Results: A total of 49 clinicians and 179 patients were randomised. Implementation of DIALOG+ was variable, with an average of 1.8 sessions (SD = 1.6) in the first 3 months and 1.1 (SD = 1.2) in the following 3 months. Patients in the DIALOG+ arm had better SQOL at 3, 6 and 12 months (p = 0.035, 0.058 and 0.014, respectively; Cohen's d = 0.29-0.34). They also had significantly fewer unmet needs at 3 and 6 months, fewer general psychopathological symptoms at all time points and better objective social outcomes at 12 months, with no significant differences in other outcomes. Overall care costs were lower in the intervention group. Conclusion: Despite variable implementation, DIALOG+ is a beneficial intervention for community patients with psychosis. As a non-expensive and potentially cost-saving, generic intervention, DIALOG+ may be widely used and may improve the effectiveness of community treatment. Further trials should test DIALOG+ in different patient groups and contexts.
Essential criteria for the methodological quality and validity of randomized controlled trials are the drop-out rates from both the experimental intervention and the study as a whole. This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed these drop-out rates in non-pharmacological schizophrenia trials. A systematic literature search was used to identify relevant trials with ≥100 sample size and to extract the drop-out data. The rates of drop-out from the experimental intervention and study were calculated with meta-analysis of proportions. Meta-regression was applied to explore the association between the study and sample characteristics and the drop-out rates. 43 RCTs were found, with drop-out from intervention ranging from 0% to 63% and study drop-out ranging from 4% to 71%. Meta-analyses of proportions showed an overall drop-out rate of 14% (95% CI: 13-15%) at the experimental intervention level and 20% (95% CI: 17-24%) at the study level. Meta-regression showed that the active intervention drop-out rates were predicted by the number of intervention sessions. In non-pharmacological schizophrenia trials, drop-out rates of less than 20% can be achieved for both the study and the experimental intervention. A high heterogeneity of drop-out rates across studies shows that even lower rates are achievable.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.