Suppr超能文献

自动化虚拟现实认知疗法与虚拟现实心理放松疗法治疗精神病患者持续性被害妄想症(THRIVE):在英国进行的一项平行组、单盲、随机对照试验及中介分析

Automated virtual reality cognitive therapy versus virtual reality mental relaxation therapy for the treatment of persistent persecutory delusions in patients with psychosis (THRIVE): a parallel-group, single-blind, randomised controlled trial in England with mediation analyses.

作者信息

Freeman Daniel, Lister Rachel, Waite Felicity, Galal Ushma, Yu Ly-Mee, Lambe Sinéad, Beckley Ariane, Bold Emily, Jenner Lucy, Diamond Rowan, Kirkham Miriam, Twivy Eve, Causier Chiara, Carr Lydia, Saidel Simone, Day Rebecca, Beacco Alejandro, Rovira Aitor, Ivins Annabel, Nah Ryan, Slater Mel, Clark David M, Rosebrock Laina

机构信息

Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.

Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; Black Country Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Dudley, UK.

出版信息

Lancet Psychiatry. 2023 Nov;10(11):836-847. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(23)00257-2. Epub 2023 Sep 21.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Persecutory delusions are a major psychiatric problem that often do not respond sufficiently to standard pharmacological or psychological treatments. We developed a new brief automated virtual reality (VR) cognitive treatment that has the potential to be used easily in clinical services. We aimed to compare VR cognitive therapy with an alternative VR therapy (mental relaxation), with an emphasis on understanding potential mechanisms of action.

METHODS

THRIVE was a parallel-group, single-blind, randomised controlled trial across four UK National Health Service trusts in England. Participants were included if they were aged 16 years or older, had a persistent (at least 3 months) persecutory delusion held with at least 50% conviction, reported feeling threatened when outside with other people, and had a primary diagnosis from the referring clinical team of a non-affective psychotic disorder. We randomly assigned (1:1) patients to either THRIVE VR cognitive therapy or VR mental relaxation, using a permuted blocks algorithm with randomly varying block size, stratified by severity of delusion. Usual care continued for all participants. Each VR therapy was provided in four sessions over approximately 4 weeks, supported by an assistant psychologist or clinical psychologist. Trial assessors were masked to group allocation. Outcomes were assessed at 0, 2 (therapy mid-point), 4 (primary endpoint, end of treatment), 8, 16, and 24 weeks. The primary outcome was persecutory delusion conviction, assessed by the Psychotic Symptoms Rating Scale (PSYRATS; rated 0-100%). Outcome analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. We assessed the treatment credibility and expectancy of the interventions and the two mechanisms (defence behaviours and safety beliefs) that the cognitive intervention was designed to target. This trial is prospectively registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN12497310.

FINDINGS

From Sept 21, 2018, to May 13, 2021 (with a pause due to COVID-19 pandemic restrictions from March 16, 2020, to Sept 14, 2020), we recruited 80 participants with persistent persecutory delusions (49 [61%] men, 31 [39%] women, with a mean age of 40 years [SD 13, range 18-73], 64 [80%] White, six [8%] Black, one [1%] Indian, three [4%] Pakistani, and six [8%] other race or ethnicity). We randomly assigned 39 (49%) participants assigned to VR cognitive therapy and 41 (51%) participants to VR mental relaxation. 33 (85%) participants who were assigned to VR cognitive therapy attended all four sessions, and 35 (85%) participants assigned to VR mental relaxation attended all four sessions. We found no significant differences between the two VR interventions in participant ratings of treatment credibility (adjusted mean difference -1·55 [95% CI -3·68 to 0·58]; p=0·15) and outcome expectancy (-0·91 [-3·42 to 1·61]; p=0·47). 77 (96%) participants provided follow-up data at the primary timepoint. Compared with VR mental relaxation, VR cognitive therapy did not lead to a greater improvement in persecutory delusions (adjusted mean difference -2·16 [-12·77 to 8·44]; p=0·69). Compared with VR mental relaxation, VR cognitive therapy did not lead to a greater reduction in use of defence behaviours (adjusted mean difference -0·71 [-4·21 to 2·79]; p=0·69) or a greater increase in belief in safety (-5·89 [-16·83 to 5·05]; p=0·29). There were 17 serious adverse events unrelated to the trial (ten events in seven participants in the VR cognitive therapy group and seven events in five participants in the VR mental relaxation group).

INTERPRETATION

The two VR interventions performed similarly, despite the fact that they had been designed to affect different mechanisms. Both interventions had high uptake rates and were associated with large improvements in persecutory delusions but it cannot be determined that the treatments accounted for the change. Immersive technologies hold promise for the treatment of severe mental health problems. However, their use will likely benefit from experimental research on the application of different therapeutic techniques and the effects on a range of potential mechanisms of action.

FUNDING

Medical Research Council Developmental Pathway Funding Scheme and National Institute for Health and Care Research Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre.

摘要

背景

被害妄想是一个主要的精神疾病问题,通常对标准的药物或心理治疗反应不佳。我们开发了一种新的简短自动化虚拟现实(VR)认知疗法,它有可能在临床服务中轻松应用。我们旨在比较VR认知疗法与另一种VR疗法(心理放松),重点是了解潜在的作用机制。

方法

THRIVE是一项在英国英格兰四个国民健康服务信托机构进行的平行组、单盲、随机对照试验。纳入标准为年龄在16岁及以上、存在持续(至少3个月)且坚信程度至少为50%的被害妄想、报告在与他人外出时感到受到威胁,并且转诊临床团队的初步诊断为非情感性精神障碍。我们使用排列块算法(块大小随机变化),按妄想严重程度分层,将患者以1:1的比例随机分配到THRIVE VR认知疗法或VR心理放松组。所有参与者继续接受常规护理。每种VR疗法在大约4周内分四个疗程提供,由助理心理学家或临床心理学家提供支持。试验评估人员对分组分配情况不知情。在0、2(治疗中点)、4(主要终点,治疗结束)、8、16和24周进行结果评估。主要结局是被害妄想坚信程度,通过精神病症状评定量表(PSYRATS;评分范围0 - 100%)进行评估。在意向性治疗人群中进行结果分析。我们评估了干预措施的治疗可信度和预期效果,以及认知干预旨在针对的两种机制(防御行为和安全信念)。该试验已在ISRCTN注册中心前瞻性注册,注册号为ISRCTN12497310。

结果

从2018年9月21日至2021年5月13日(因2020年3月16日至2020年9月14日的COVID - 19大流行限制而暂停),我们招募了80名患有持续性被害妄想的参与者(49名[61%]男性,31名[39%]女性,平均年龄40岁[标准差13,范围18 - 73岁],64名[80%]为白人,6名[8%]为黑人,1名[1%]为印度人,3名[4%]为巴基斯坦人,6名[8%]为其他种族或族裔)。我们将39名(49%)参与者随机分配到VR认知疗法组,41名(51%)参与者随机分配到VR心理放松组。分配到VR认知疗法组的33名(85%)参与者参加了所有四个疗程,分配到VR心理放松组的35名(85%)参与者参加了所有四个疗程。我们发现两种VR干预在参与者对治疗可信度的评分(调整后平均差异 -1.55[95%置信区间 -3.68至0.58];p = 0.15)和结果预期(-0.91[-3.42至1.61];p = 0.47)方面没有显著差异。77名(96%)参与者在主要时间点提供了随访数据。与VR心理放松相比,VR认知疗法在被害妄想方面没有带来更大改善(调整后平均差异 -2.16[-12.77至8.44];p = 0.69)。与VR心理放松相比,VR认知疗法在防御行为的使用减少方面没有更大效果(调整后平均差异 -0.71[-4.21至2.79];p = 0.69),在安全信念增加方面也没有更大效果(-5.89[-16.83至5.05];p = 0.29)。有17起与试验无关的严重不良事件(VR认知疗法组7名参与者发生10起事件,VR心理放松组5名参与者发生7起事件)。

解读

尽管两种VR干预设计旨在影响不同机制,但它们的表现相似。两种干预的接受率都很高,并且与被害妄想的大幅改善相关,但无法确定治疗是否是导致变化的原因。沉浸式技术有望用于治疗严重的心理健康问题。然而,其应用可能会受益于对不同治疗技术的应用以及对一系列潜在作用机制影响的实验研究。

资金来源

医学研究理事会发展途径资助计划和国家卫生与保健研究机构牛津健康生物医学研究中心。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验