Background In the UK, clozapine is the only licensed treatment for treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS). However, it is underused because initiation is often limited by the need for in-patient admission, which is costly and unattractive to patients. Community clozapine services may address this.Aims To describe a targeted out-patient clinic (Treating Unmet Needs in Psychiatry (TUNE-UP)) for TRS management and assess its impact on community clozapine initiation rates.Method We reviewed clozapine titrations of patients under four community mental health teams from September 2021 to January 2025, recording whether titration occurred as in- or out-patient. The TUNE-UP clozapine clinic operated for 12 months (September 2023 to September 2024). Initiation rates during the TUNE-UP period were compared with those when the service was unavailable, using Poisson regression. Clinical outcomes were assessed using scales including the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS).Results Fifty-one individuals commenced clozapine during the study period. There was a significant increase in the rates of community initiation in the TUNE-UP period (11.0 per year) compared with those outside of this period (1.71 per year; incidence risk ratio 6.42 [95% CI 2.04-20.2, P = 0.0015]). Patients seen by TUNE-UP showed significant improvements in PANSS (n = 6, median improvement 21.5 [95% CI 7.0-33.0], P = 0.03).Conclusions A specialist service was associated with a significant increase in community clozapine initiations. This approach offers a strategy to improve TRS treatment in the community.

Background: Up to one third of patients with schizophrenia do not benefit from standard antipsychotic treatment, termed treatment resistant schizophrenia (TRS). Clozapine is the only licensed treatment in TRS and is associated with better outcomes. However, it is underused, as its initiation is often limited by the need for inpatient admission, which is costly and unattractive to patients. Community clozapine titration services may address this. Aims: To describe a targeted outpatient clinic (TUNE-UP) for TRS management and assess its impact on clozapine initiation rates. Method: We reviewed clozapine titrations for patients under four community mental health teams in the United Kingdom from September 2021 to January 2025, noting whether titration occurred in inpatient or outpatient settings. The TUNE-UP clozapine clinic operated for 12 months (September 2023 to September 2024). Initiation rates during the TUNE-UP period were compared with rates when the service was unavailable using Poisson regression. Clinical outcomes were assessed using scales such as the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) for symptom severity and the Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale (SOFAS) for functioning. Results: 61 individuals were commenced on clozapine. During the TUNE-UP clinic period of operation, community initiation rates increased to 11.0 per year (up from 1.33 per year when the service was unavailable), while inpatient initiations were similar (11.0 per year vs. 11.67 per year). Increases in total initiations (p = 0.048) and community initiations (p = 0.0003) were statistically significant. Patients seen by TUNE-UP had improvements in PANSS (mean baseline 63.3 (SD 18.3); mean improvement 20.5 (SD 12.2; p = 0.009)), and SOFAS (mean baseline 48.3 (SD 7.5); mean improvement 8.8 (SD 7.1, p = 0.028)). Conclusion: A specialist community service was associated with a significant increase in clozapine initiations alongside improved clinical outcomes. This approach offers a clinically and cost effective strategy to enhance treatment for TRS. ### Competing Interest Statement RAM has received speaker/consultancy fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Karuna, Lundbeck, Newron, Otsuka, and Viatris, and co-directs a company that designs digital resources to support treatment of mental ill health. TP has received speaker/consultancy fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Recordati, Lundbeck, Otsuka, Janssen, CNX Therapeutics, Sunovion, ROVI Biotech, Schwabe Pharma, and Lecturing Minds Stockholm AB; he receives book royalties from Wiley Blackwell; he co-directs a company that designs digital resources to support treatment of mental illness. Other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. ### Funding Statement RAMs work is funded by a Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Career Development Fellowship (224625/Z/21/Z). This work and the TUNE UP clinic have been developed as part of a collaborative working partnership between Oxford Health NHS Trust and Boehringer Ingelheim Ltd. VM is supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (P500PM_217669). TP is supported by the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Maudsley Charity, the Brain and Behaviour Research Foundation, the UK Academy of Medical Sciences, and the UKRI Hub for Metabolic Psychiatry (grant reference MR/Z503563/1, platform grant code MR/Z000548/1). JBF is supported by an NIHR Academic Clinical Fellowship (ACF-2023-13-016). ### Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below: This project was approved by the Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust Audit Management and Tracking service with further ethical approvals not required. I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable. Yes Data available from authors on request.

BACKGROUND:Scalable assessment tools for precision psychiatry are of increasing clinical interest. One clinical risk assessment that might be improved by such approaches is assessment of violence perpetration risk. This is an important adverse outcome to reduce for some people presenting to services for first-episode psychosis. A prediction tool (Oxford Mental Illness and Violence (OxMIV)) has been externally validated in these services, but clinical acceptability and role need to be examined and developed. AIMS:This study aimed to understand clinical use of the OxMIV tool to support violence risk management in early intervention in psychosis services in terms of acceptability to clinicians, patients and carers, practical feasibility, perceived utility, impact and role. METHOD:A mixed methods approach integrated quantitative data on utility and patterns of use of the OxMIV tool over 12 months in two services with qualitative data from interviews of 20 clinicians and 12 patients and carers. RESULTS:The OxMIV tool was used 141 times, mostly in new assessments. Required information was available, with only family history items scored unknown to any notable degree. The OxMIV tool was deemed helpful by clinicians in most cases, especially if there were previous risk concerns. It was acceptable practically, and broadly for the service, for which its concordance with clinical judgement was important. Patients and carers thought it could improve openness. There was some limited impact on plans for clinical support. CONCLUSIONS:The OxMIV tool met an identified clinical need to support clinical assessment for violence risk. Linkage to intervention pathways is a research priority.

Summary Background 'Early Intervention in Psychosis' (EIP) services have been associated with improved outcomes for early psychosis. However, these services are heterogeneous and many provide different components of treatment. The impact of this variation on the sustained treatment effects is unknown. Methods We performed a systematic review and component network meta-analysis (cNMA) of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared specialised intervention services for early psychosis. We searched CENTRAL (published and unpublished), EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science from inception to February 2023. Primary outcomes were negative and positive psychotic symptoms at 3-month and 1-year follow-up and treatment dropouts. Secondary outcomes were depressive symptoms and social functioning at 1-year follow-up. We registered a protocol for our study in PROSPERO (CRD42017057420). Findings We identified 37 RCTs including 4599 participants. Participants' mean age was 25.8 years (SD 6.0) and 64.0% were men. We found evidence that psychological interventions (this component grouped all psychological treatment intended to treat, or ameliorate the consequences of, psychotic symptoms) are beneficial for reducing negative symptoms (iSMD −0.24, 95% CI −0.44 to −0.05, p = 0.014) at 3-month follow-up and may be associated with clinically relevant benefits in improving social functioning scores at 1-year follow-up (iSMD −0.52, 95% CI −1.05 to 0.01, p = 0.052). The addition of case management has a beneficial effect on reducing negative symptoms (iSMD −1.17, 95% CI −2.24 to −0.11, p = 0.030) and positive symptoms (iSMD −1.05, 95% CI −2.02 to −0.08, p = 0.033) at 1-year follow-up. Pharmacotherapy was present in all trial arms, meaning it was not possible to examine the specific effects of this component. Interpretation Our findings suggest psychological interventions and case management in addition to pharmacotherapy as the core components of services for early psychosis to achieve sustained clinical benefits. Our conclusions are limited by the small number of studies and sparsely connected networks. Funding National Institute for Health and Care Research.

Almost three quarters of mental illnesses start by the age of 25, yet youth (18-25-year-olds) are often underrepresented in U.K. services. This is particularly true for those of ethnic minorities. In this study, we aimed to understand how young Pakistani women and their parents make decisions to seek help for severe mental health problems, and the barriers and facilitators to accessing professional help. Young Pakistani women with experience of severe mental health problems and their parents were recruited from a community sample. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with six young people and two parents. Data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Pakistani culture and its interplay with British culture strongly influenced the decisions and ability of young Pakistani women and their parents to help-seek, largely through the role of stigma. Low mental health literacy, stigma, and a lack of culturally informed services were identified as the most common barriers to accessing care. These barriers fed into the internalized stigma these young women experienced which, through fear of damaged reputation and personal prejudices, posed further barriers to seeking help. Participants highlighted recommendations for both individual-level (e.g., increased education and awareness) and service-level (e.g., greater choice over care) change to facilitate accessibility of professional help. Young Pakistani women face multiple culturally related challenges to accessing care for severe mental health problems at both the individual- and service-level. Novel suggestions to address these challenges, such as including youth peer support workers in services, may facilitate more inclusive and accessible services.

OBJECTIVES:Most lifetime mental health problems (MHP) start before the age of 25. Yet young people-particularly those of minority backgrounds-often do not seek or access professional help. In the UK, young people of Eastern European (EE) backgrounds represent a large minority group; however, little is known about their experiences of MHP and help-seeking. In this study, we aim to understand the help-seeking process from the perspectives of EE young people. DESIGN:We used a qualitative study design with semi-structured individual interviews. The results were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. METHOD:Twelve young people (18-25 years) of EE backgrounds, living in Oxfordshire, UK, took part. All participants had experienced a severe MHP and were identified in the community. RESULTS:EE young people's experiences of MHP and help-seeking were driven by a sense of being caught between different cultures and simultaneously needing to navigate the potentially contrasting expectations of both cultures. This process was reinforced or tempered by the perceived continuing influence of young people's families, that is, families with more open views about MHP made it easier for young people to navigate through the process of help-seeking. Young people's internalised cultural and familial beliefs about MHP affected their decision-making when experiencing difficulties, their levels of trust in services, and perceived sense of resourcefulness and ability to cope. CONCLUSIONS:Recognising and responding to the cultural tension that young people of EE backgrounds may experience can help us to develop more accessible and inclusive mental health services.

BACKGROUND:Sleep disturbance is common and problematic for young people at ultra-high risk of psychosis. Sleep disruption is a contributory causal factor in the occurrence of mental health problems, including psychotic experiences, anxiety, and depression. The implication is that treating sleep problems might have additional benefits on mental health outcomes in individuals at high risk. The present study had two aims: first, to establish the feasibility and acceptability of a randomised controlled trial to treat sleep problems with the aim of reducing psychotic experiences in young people at ultra-high risk of psychosis; and second, to provide proof of concept of the clinical efficacy of the treatment. METHODS:We did a parallel group, single-blind, randomised controlled feasibility trial in two National Health Service trusts in England. Eligible participants were aged 14-25 years, a patient of mental health services, assessed as being at ultra-high risk of psychosis on the Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States, and having current sleep problems (score of ≥15 on the self-report Insomnia Severity Index [ISI]). Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to either a targeted psychological therapy for sleep problems (SleepWell) plus usual care or usual care alone via an automated online system, with non-deterministic minimisation that balanced participants for ISI score and referring service. The SleepWell therapy was delivered on an individual basis in approximately eight 1-h sessions over 12 weeks. Assessments were done at 0, 3, and 9 months, with trial assessors masked to treatment allocation. The key feasibility outcomes were the numbers of patients identified, recruited, and retained, treatment uptake, and data completion. Treatment acceptability was measured with the Abbreviated Acceptability Rating Profile (AARP). In preliminary clinical assessments, the primary clinical outcome was insomnia at 3 and 9 months assessed with the ISI, reported by randomised group (intention-to-treat analysis). Safety was assessed in all randomly assigned participants. The trial was prospectively registered on ISRCTN, 85601537, and is completed. FINDINGS:From Nov 18, 2020, to Jan 26, 2022, 67 young people were screened, of whom 40 (60%) at ultra-high risk of psychosis were recruited. Mean age was 16·9 years (SD 2·5; range 14-23), and most participants identified as female (n=19 [48%]) or male (n=19 [48%]) and as White (n=32 [80%]). 21 participants were randomly assigned to SleepWell therapy plus usual care and 19 to usual care alone. All participants provided data on at least one follow-up visit. 39 (98%) of 40 participants completed the primary outcome assessment at 3 and 9 months. 20 (95%) of 21 participants assigned to SleepWell therapy received the prespecified minimum treatment dose of at least four sessions. The median treatment acceptability score on the AARP was 48 (IQR 46 to 48; n=17; maximum possible score 48). At the post-intervention follow-up (3 months), compared with the usual care alone group, the SleepWell therapy group had a reduction in insomnia severity (ISI adjusted mean difference -8·12 [95% CI -11·60 to -4·63]; Cohen's d=-2·67 [95% CI -3·81 to -1·52]), which was sustained at 9 months (ISI adjusted mean difference -5·83 [-9·31 to -2·35]; Cohen's d=-1·91 [-3·06 to -0·77]). Among the 40 participants, eight adverse events were reported in six participants (two [11%] participants in the usual care group and four [19%] participants in the SleepWell therapy group). One serious adverse event involving hospital admission for a physical health problem was reported in the SleepWell therapy group, and one patient in the usual care alone group transitioned to psychosis. None of these events were classed as being related to trial treatment or procedures. INTERPRETATION:A randomised controlled trial of a targeted psychological sleep therapy for young people at ultra-high risk of psychosis is feasible. Patients can be retained in the trial and assessments done by masked assessors. Uptake of the sleep therapy was high, and we found preliminary evidence of sustained reductions in sleep problems. A definitive multicentre trial is now needed. FUNDING:NIHR Research for Patient Benefit and NIHR Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre.

Background Participation in clinical research is associated with better patient outcomes and higher staff retention and satisfaction rates. Nevertheless, patient recruitment to mental health studies is challenging due to a reliance on clinician or patient referrals (standard approach). To empower patients and make healthcare research more equitable, we explored a novel researcher-led approach, called ‘Count Me In’ (CMI).Objective To evaluate a 12-month implementation of CMI in a routine clinical setting.Methods CMI was launched in August 2021 in a mental health National Health Service (NHS) Trust in England. Patients (aged 18+) learnt about CMI at their initial clinical appointment. Unless they opted out, they became contactable for research (via research informatics searches).Findings After 12 months, 368 patients opted out and 22 741 became contactable through CMI, including 2716 through the standard approach and 20 025 through electronic searches (637% increase). Of those identified via electronic searches, 738 were contacted about specific studies and 270 consented to participate. Five themes were identified based on patient and staff experiences of CMI: ‘level of awareness and accessibility of CMI’, ‘perceptions of research and perceived engagement with CMI’, ‘inclusive research practice’, ‘engagement and incentives for research participation’, and ‘relationships between clinical and research settings’.Conclusions CMI (vs standard) led to a larger and diverse patient cohort and was favoured by patients and staff. Yet a shift in the NHS research culture is needed to ensure that this diversity translates to actual research participation.Clinical implications Through collaboration with other NHS Trusts and services, key funders (National Institute for Health and Care Research) and new national initiatives (Office for Life Sciences Mental Health Mission), CMI has the potential to address recruitment challenges through rapid patient recruitment into time-sensitive country-wide studies.

Improving personality disorder (PD) care across a healthcare system is an important but complex task and one that has been endeavoured by many organisations. Oxford Health National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust recently received funding from the NHS Long Term Plan’s Community Mental Health Framework to improve PD care across Buckinghamshire mental health services. Therefore, Oxford Healthcare Improvement performed a system-wide diagnostic assessment of gaps in the provision of care for patients with PD and produced a list of recommendations to aid future improvement work. We used a robust and systematic approach that included, a range of quality improvement methods, the mapping of patient pathways, collection of quantitative data on the utilisation of these pathways and focus groups with staff, patients and carers. This paper summarises our mixed-method approach to show how the first stage of improving a complex mental health system could be approached. It also outlines potential areas for improvement associated with the care and treatment of patients with PD and change ideas to address these areas. These include, ensuring a specialised approach to triage and assessment for patients with PD, upskilling the workforce across the system and utilising a variety of evidence-based practices to best support the range of patient needs. As well as introducing a leadership structure to ensure and support improvement work associated with PD care and treatment. We believe our methodological approach could be used beyond improving PD care and we hope that sharing our methods will aid organisations when approaching system-wide improvement work.

Background Electronic Health Records (EHRs) can help clinicians to plan, document and deliver care for patients in healthcare services. When used consistently, EHRs can advance patient safety and quality, and reduce clinician's workload. However, usability problems can make it difficult for clinicians to use EHRs effectively, which can negatively impact both healthcare professionals and patients. Objective To improve usability of EHRs within a mental health service in the UK. Methods This was a feasibility study conducted with two mental health teams. A mixed-methods approach was employed. Focus group discussions with clinicians identified existing usability problems in EHRs and changes were made to address these problems. Updated EHR assessment forms were evaluated by comparing the following measures pre and post changes: (1) usability testing to monitor time spent completing and duplicating patient information in EHRs, (2) clinician's experience of using EHRs, and (3) proportion of completed EHR assessment forms. Results Usability testing with clinicians (n = 3) showed that the time taken to complete EHR assessment forms and time spent duplicating patient information decreased. Clinician's experience of completing EHR assessment forms also significantly improved post changes compared to baseline (n = 71; p < 0.005). There was a significant increase in completion of most EHR forms by both teams after EHR usability improvements (all at p < 0.01). Conclusions Usability improvements to EHRs can reduce the time taken to complete forms, advance clinician's experience and increase usage of EHRs. It is important to engage healthcare professionals in the usability improvement process of EHRs in mental health services.

Background Incidents of self-harm are common on psychiatric wards. There are a wide variety of therapeutic, social and environmental interventions that have shown some promise in reducing self-harm in in-patient settings, but there is no consensus on the most appropriate means of reducing and managing self-harm during in-patient admissions. Aims To review interventions used to reduce self-harm and suicide attempts on adolescent and adult psychiatric in-patient wards. Method A systematic literature search was conducted between 14 March 2019 and 25 January 2021 using PsycINFO and Medline (PROSPERO ID: CRD42019129046). A total of 23 papers were identified for full review. Results Interventions fell into two categories, therapeutic interventions given to individual patients and organisational interventions aimed at improving patient–staff communication and the overall ward milieu. Dialectical behaviour therapy was the most frequently implemented and effective therapeutic intervention, with seven of eight studies showing some benefit. Three of the six ward-based interventions reduced self-harm. Two studies that used a combined therapeutic and ward-based approach significantly reduced self-harm on the wards. The quality of the studies was highly variable, and some interventions were poorly described. There was no indication of harmful impact of any of the approaches reported in this review. Conclusions A number of approaches show some promise in reducing self-harm, but the evidence is not strong enough to recommend any particular approach. Current evidence remains weak overall but provides a foundation for a more robust programme of research aimed at providing a more substantial evidence base for this neglected problem on wards.

This paper gives a narrative account of how the Oxford Healthcare Improvement Centre has embedded continuous quality improvement (CQI) across both mental health and community services in Oxford, UK. The aim of the centre is to develop capability across healthcare services, with frontline staff leading CQI independently. The paper discusses the various methods employed to achieve this aim, including the provision of training, mentoring and support to those undertaking improvement work, alongside developing the required governance for CQI.

Constant observation is frequently conducted on inpatient psychiatric units to manage patients at risk of harming themselves or others. Despite its widespread use, there is little evidence of the efficacy of the practice or of its impact on patients and nursing staff. Unnecessary use of this practice can be restrictive and distressing for all involved and can cause considerable strain on healthcare resources. We sought to review interventions aiming to improve the quality and safety of constant observation or to reduce unnecessary use of this restrictive practice on adult inpatient psychiatric wards. A systematic search conducted in December 2018 using PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, EMBASE and Google Scholar identified 24 studies with interventions related to constant observation. Only 16 studies evaluated a total of 13 interventions. The most common intervention components were changes to team, education and training for staff, changes to record keeping and assessment, and involving patients in care. A range of outcome measures were used to evaluate interventions. Over half of the interventions showed some positive impact on constant observation. One study recorded patient feedback. All interventions were targeted towards mental health nurses. Overall, there is no consensus on how best to improve the safety and quality of constant observations or reduce its unnecessary use. Studies vary widely in design, intervention and outcome measures. Existing research does however suggest that teamwork interventions can improve the patient experience of constant observation and safely reduce their degree and frequency. Priorities for future research on constant observations are highlighted.

BackgroundEvidence for the effectiveness of treatments in early-onset psychosis is sparse. Current guidance for the treatment of early-onset psychosis is mostly extrapolated from trials in adult populations. The UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has recommended evaluation of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of antipsychotic drugs versus psychological intervention (cognitive behavioural therapy [CBT] and family intervention) versus the combination of these treatments for early-onset psychosis. The aim of this study was to establish the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial of antipsychotic monotherapy, psychological intervention monotherapy, and antipsychotics plus psychological intervention in adolescents with first-episode psychosis.MethodsWe did a multicentre pilot and feasibility trial according to a randomised, single-blind, three-arm, controlled design. We recruited participants from seven UK National Health Service Trust sites. Participants were aged 14–18 years; help-seeking; had presented with first-episode psychosis in the past year; were under the care of a psychiatrist; were showing current psychotic symptoms; and met ICD-10 criteria for schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or delusional disorder, or met the entry criteria for an early intervention for psychosis service. Participants were assigned (1:1:1) to antipsychotics, psychological intervention (CBT with optional family intervention), or antipsychotics plus psychological intervention. Randomisation was via a web-based randomisation system, with permuted blocks of random size, stratified by centre and family contact. CBT incorporated up to 26 sessions over 6 months plus up to four booster sessions, and family intervention incorporated up to six sessions over 6 months. Choice and dose of antipsychotic were at the discretion of the treating consultant psychiatrist. Participants were followed up for a maximum of 12 months. The primary outcome was feasibility (ie, data on trial referral and recruitment, session attendance or medication adherence, retention, and treatment acceptability) and the proposed primary efficacy outcome was total score on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) at 6 months. Primary outcomes were analysed by intention to treat. Safety outcomes were reported according to as-treated status, for all patients who had received at least one session of CBT or family intervention, or at least one dose of antipsychotics. The study was prospectively registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN80567433.FindingsOf 101 patients referred to the study, 61 patients (mean age 16·3 years [SD 1·3]) were recruited from April 10, 2017, to Oct 31, 2018, 18 of whom were randomly assigned to psychological intervention, 22 to antipsychotics, and 21 to antipsychotics plus psychological intervention. The trial recruitment rate was 68% of our target sample size of 90 participants. The study had a low referral to recruitment ratio (around 2:1), a high rate of retention (51 [84%] participants retained at the 6-month primary endpoint), a high rate of adherence to psychological intervention (defined as six or more sessions of CBT; in 32 [82%] of 39 participants in the monotherapy and combined groups), and a moderate rate of adherence to antipsychotic medication (defined as at least 6 consecutive weeks of exposure to antipsychotics; in 28 [65%] of 43 participants in the monotherapy and combined groups). Mean scores for PANSS total at the 6-month primary endpoint were 68·6 (SD 17·3) for antipsychotic monotherapy (6·2 points lower than at randomisation), 59·8 (13·7) for psychological intervention (13·1 points lower than at randomisation), and 62·0 (15·9) for antipsychotics plus psychological intervention (13·9 points lower than at randomisation). A good clinical response at 6 months (defined as ≥50% improvement in PANSS total score) was achieved in four (22%) of 18 patients receiving antipsychotic monotherapy, five (31%) of 16 receiving psychological intervention, and five (29%) of 17 receiving antipsychotics plus psychological intervention. In as-treated groups, serious adverse events occurred in eight [35%] of 23 patients in the combined group, two [13%] of 15 in the antipsychotics group, four [24%] of 17 in the psychological intervention group, and four [80%] of five who did not receive any treatment. No serious adverse events were considered to be related to participation in the trial.InterpretationThis trial is the first to show that a head-to-head clinical trial comparing psychological intervention, antipsychotics, and their combination is safe in young people with first-episode psychosis. However, the feasibility of a larger trial is unclear because of site-specific recruitment challenges, and amendments to trial design would be needed for an adequately powered clinical and cost-effectiveness trial that provides robust evidence.FundingNational Institute for Health Research.

Objective: The triple bottom line (TBL) of sustainability is an important emerging conceptual framework which considers the combined economic, environmental and social impacts of an activity. Despite its clear relevance to the healthcare context, it has not yet been applied to the evaluation of a healthcare intervention. The aim of this study was to demonstrate whether doing so is feasible and useful. Design: Secondary data analysis of a 12-month randomized controlled trial. Setting: Community based mental health care. Participants: Patients with chronic psychotic illnesses (n = 333). Intervention(s): Community treatment orders. Main Outcome Measure(s): Financial and environmental (CO2 equivalent) costs of care, obtained from healthcare service use data, were calculated using publicly available standard costs; social sustainability was assessed using standardized social outcome measures included in the trial data. Results: Standardized costing and CO(2)e emissions figures were successfully obtained from publicly available data, and social outcomes were available directly from the trial data. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that TBL assessment can be retrospectively calculated for a healthcare intervention to provide a more complete assessment of the true costs of an intervention. A basic methodology was advanced to demonstrate the feasibility of the approach, although considerable further conceptual and methodological work is needed to develop a generalizable methodology that enables prospective inclusion of a TBL assessment in healthcare evaluations. If achieved, this would represent a significant milestone in the development of more sustainable healthcare services. If increasing the sustainability of healthcare is a priority, then the TBL approach may be a promising way forward.

BACKGROUND:Effective interventions, targeting key contributory causal factors, are needed to prevent the emergence of severe mental health problems in young people. Insomnia is a common clinical issue that is problematic in its own right but that also leads to the development and persistence of psychotic experiences. The implication is that treating sleep problems may prevent the onset of psychosis. We collected initial case series data with 12 young people at ultra-high-risk of psychosis. Post-intervention, there were improvements in sleep, depression and psychotic experiences. Now we test the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial, with a clinical aim to treat sleep problems and hence reduce depression, psychotic experiences, and prevent transition to psychosis. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:A randomised controlled feasibility trial will be conducted. Forty patients aged 14 to 25 years who are at ultra-high-risk of psychosis and have sleep disturbance will be recruited from National Health Service (NHS) mental health services. Participants will be randomised to receive either a novel, targeted, youth-focussed sleep intervention in addition to usual care or usual care alone. Assessor-blinded assessments will be conducted at baseline, 3 months (post-intervention) and 9 months (follow-up). The eight-session psychological intervention will target the key mechanisms which disrupt sleep: circadian rhythm irregularities, low sleep pressure, and hyperarousal. To gain an in-depth understanding of participants' views on the acceptability of the intervention and study procedures, 16 participants (n=10 intervention, n=6 control) will take part in qualitative interviews. Analyses will focus on feasibility outcomes (recruitment, retention, and treatment uptake rates) and provide initial CI estimates of intervention effects. Thematic analysis of the qualitative interviews will assess the acceptability of the intervention and trial procedures. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The trial has received ethical approval from the NHS Health Research Authority. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations, and lay networks. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:ISRCTN85601537.

Reading the first part of this book presents a striking contrast between current preoccupations in healthcare systems and the science presented here. In other words, between extant public concerns about entitlement to, funding of, and delivering healthcare in the second decade of the twenty-first century and the contents of Chapters 2, 3 and 4.

This book presents a compelling weight of evidence about how belonging to social groups confers advantages that help people to achieve and sustain good physical and mental health. A huge volume of work has been done to take the evidence-base to where it currently stands. But, arguably, the work required to embed these psychosocial understandings and, importantly, their implications for healthcare, is a larger and more challenging task. The contents of Chapters 23, 24 and 25 should be real assets in so doing.

We developed a fictional town, Smithtown, to support the exercises we undertook during the seminars that gave rise to this book. The town, and a small selection of its inhabitants, were presented to the seminars in 2014, in order to ground the ideas we discussed and focus our conversations about what approaches and actions might assist the population generally and, particularly, following a disastrous flood. We have included a summarised version of it in the book because we thought that readers might wish to think about the implications of the contents of this book for how responsible authorities might approach the challenge of planning for the population of Smithtown. Also, the nature of this fictional town and its recent narrative raises questions for theory, research and practice. Although the town and its inhabitants are entirely fictional, the problems faced by its inhabitants are not..

SummaryThe UK's Choosing Wisely campaign aims to tackle the pressing issue of overuse in healthcare (i.e. overdiagnosis and overtreatment) through improving awareness and promoting shared decisionmaking. This campaign involves medical societies developing lists of interventions that are of questionable value and so require a genuine discussion between doctors and patients about their use. This article is about the problem of overuse and the launch of the Royal College of Psychiatrists' Choosing Wisely campaign. It provides a critical review of why this might occur and whether Choosing Wisely is likely to be successful.Learning Objectives• Understand the aims of the Choosing Wisely programme• Define overdiagnosis and overtreatment• Develop a critical perspective on potential areas of overuse in your clinical practice