Are multi family groups appropriate for patients with first episode psychosis? A 5‐year naturalistic follow‐up study

Røssberg, Jan Ivar; Johannessen, J. O.; Klungsøyr, Ole; Opjordsmoen, Stein; Evensen, Julie; Fjell, Anne; Haahr, Ulrik; Joa, Inge; Langeveld, Johannes; Larsen, Tor Ketil; Melle, Ingrid; Rund, Bjørn Rishovd; Simonsen, Erik; Velden, W ten; Vaglum, Per; Friis, Svein; McGlashan, T. H.

doi:10.1111/j.1600-0447.2010.01571.x

Cited by 23 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, relapse prevention gains were not maintained at follow up. Closer inspection of the studies included in this follow-up meta-analysis revealed that only Chien et al (2016a) showed sustained gains in terms of risk of relapse at a 6 month follow, whereas Leavey et al (2004) and Rossberg et al (2010) with 9-month and 5-year follow ups respectively failed to show sustained gains. (Please see Table 3b in Supplementary Materials).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…Seven studies were conducted in Europe, three in North America, two in Australia, one in Hong Kong and one in Mainland China. Eleven studies employed randomized controlled designs, one a controlled clinical trial (Browning et al, 2013) and two used an uncontrolled design (e.g., a cohort analytic design; Rossberg et al, 2010 and Rund et al, 1994). …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some interventions were delivered to carers only (Cozolino et al, 1988; McCann et al, 2013; Calvo et al, 2014; Chien et al, 2016a,b), whilst others invited service users to join all or part of the intervention (Goldstein et al, 1978; Rund et al, 1994; Zhang et al, 1994; Linszen et al, 1996; De Giacomo et al, 1997; Rossberg et al, 2010; Miklowitz et al, 2014; O'Brien et al, 2014). Three studies did not mention whether service users attended the sessions or not (Leavey et al, 2004; Gleeson et al, 2010; Browning et al, 2013).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Do Family Interventions Improve Outcomes in Early Psychosis? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Family interventions for psychosis (FIp) are effective in reducing service user relapse and carer distress in people with schizophrenia-spectrum conditions. Several treatment and best practice guidelines recommend FIp for all people with schizophrenia. However, outcome findings in relation to early psychosis groups have been inconsistent. The current paper reports a systematic review and meta-analyses of articles that evaluated FIp in early psychosis with a clearly defined comparison group. A combination of electronic database searches (using PsychINFO, Medline, and CENTRAL), citation searches and hand searches of key journals and reviews was conducted. Peer-reviewed articles published in English from database inception to June 2016 were included. Methodological quality was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool (EPHPP). Seventeen papers from 14 studies met inclusion criteria for review, the overall quality of which was moderate. Meta-analytic synthesis showed that FIp improved service user functioning and reduced the likelihood of relapse by the end of treatment. Psychotic symptoms were significantly reduced in the FIp group at follow up, but this was not evident at end of treatment. In terms of FIp target mechanisms, carers receiving FIp were more likely to shift from high to low expressed emotion and less likely to report patient focused criticism or engage in conflict communication than carers randomized to standard care. Carer burden and well-being were improved by the end of treatment but gains were not sustained at follow up. FIp had no impact on carer emotional over-involvement. The findings indicate that FIp is an effective intervention for early psychosis service users and their relatives. However, further research is required to establish which key therapeutic components of FIp are most effective for whom, in addition to understanding the mechanisms by which FIp might affect positive change.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 91%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Do Family Interventions Improve Outcomes in Early Psychosis? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To our knowledge, only five empirical studies have examined the effect of family interventions in FEP. Two studies show that family work might be beneficial for patients with an FEP (Goldstein, Rodnick, Evans, May, & Steinberg, 1978;Zhang, Wang, Li, & Phillips, 1994), two studies show a worsened outcome for patients participating in family work interventions (Linszen et al, 1996;Rossberg et al, 2010), and one study shows no effect of the family intervention (Leavey et al, 2004).…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Third, it may be that the intervention is perceived as stressful and thereby interferes with the recovery process where stress reduction is the goal. Fourth, there might be a discrepancy between the patient's and the family members' needs (Rossberg et al, 2010).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Patients’ and Family Members’ Experiences of a Psychoeducational Family Intervention after a First Episode Psychosis: A Qualitative Study

Nilsen¹,

Frich²,

Friis³

et al. 2013

Issues in Mental Health Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study is to explore patients' and family members' experiences of the different elements of a psychoeducational family intervention. A qualitative, explorative study was performed based on digitally recorded in-depth interviews with 12 patients and 14 family members. The interview data were transcribed in a slightly modified verbatim mode and analysed using systematic text condensation. Six themes that both patients and family members experienced as important in the family intervention were identified: alliance, support, anxiety and tension, knowledge and learning, time, and structure. A good relationship between the group leaders and participants was essential in preventing dropout. Meeting with other people in the same situation reduced feelings of shame and increased hope for the future. Hearing real life stories was experienced as being more important for gaining new knowledge about psychosis than lectures and workshops. However, many patients experienced anxiety and tension during the meetings. The group format could be demanding for patients immediately after a psychotic episode and for those still struggling with distressing psychotic symptoms. Group leaders need to recognise patients' levels of anxiety before, and during, the intervention, and consider the different needs of patients and family members in regards to when the intervention starts, the group format, and the patients' level of psychotic symptoms. The findings in the present study may help to tailor family work to better meet the needs of both patients and family members.

show abstract

Involving the Family in Early Interventions

Fadden

2014

Early Intervention in Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Are multi family groups appropriate for patients with first episode psychosis? A 5‐year naturalistic follow‐up study

Abstract: Multi family groups appear to increase the chance of retaining patients in a follow-up study, but adjustment of the programme may be necessary with first episode psychosis patients to meet their needs better.

Cited by 23 publications

References 40 publications

Do Family Interventions Improve Outcomes in Early Psychosis? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Do Family Interventions Improve Outcomes in Early Psychosis? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Patients’ and Family Members’ Experiences of a Psychoeducational Family Intervention after a First Episode Psychosis: A Qualitative Study

Involving the Family in Early Interventions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About