AIMS:Poor sleep is highly prevalent in young people and increases risk of mental health difficulties, yet access to sleep interventions remains limited. This paper evaluates the use of a sleep intervention delivered by non-expert practitioners in a secondary care youth mental health service. METHOD:Assistant psychologists were trained to deliver a six-session 1:1 cognitive-behavioural sleep intervention adapted for use with young people with mental health difficulties. A within-subject design assessed clinical outcomes relating to sleep (Insomnia Severity Index), psychological distress and personal goals (Goal Based Outcome Measures) at four time points. RESULTS:High referral, intervention take-up (82.82%) and completion (70%) rates were reported, together with high baseline levels of insomnia (Insomnia Severity Index mean 20.47, SD 3.68) and poor sleep efficiency (56.36%, SD 17.23). Fifty-six young people (average age 19.2 years, SD 3.25) were included in the outcome analysis. Statistically and clinically significant improvements were seen across all outcome measures, with 68% no longer meeting clinical threshold (ISI ≥15) for insomnia at endpoint. CONCLUSIONS:This study demonstrates exceptionally high levels of clinical need and engagement with a sleep intervention adapted specifically for young people with mental health difficulties. Whilst limited by the uncontrolled design, large improvements in insomnia and psychological distress support its effectiveness and utility in clinical settings. More robust implementation and evaluation is warranted in broader youth mental health services to promote earlier access.

Background: There is increasing evidence of a strong association between sleep and mental health in both adolescents and adults. CBT for insomnia is being applied to good effect with adults with mental health difficulties but there are few studies examining its applicability to adolescents within mental health services. Method: We carried out a case series analysis (n = 15) looking at the feasibility, accessibility and impact of a low-intensity sleep intervention for young people (14-25 years) being seen by a secondary care Youth Mental Health team in the UK. The intervention was based on cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia (CBTi) and acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) approaches and involved six individual sessions delivered on a weekly basis by a graduate psychologist. Routine outcome measures were used to monitor insomnia, psychological distress and functioning with assessments at baseline, session 3, session 6 and at 4 weeks after end of intervention. All participants scored in the clinical range for insomnia at the start of the study. Results: High uptake, attendance and measure completion rates were observed. Large effect sizes were observed for insomnia, psychological distress and functioning. Twelve of the fifteen participants (80%) no longer scored above threshold for insomnia at follow-up. All seven under-18s no longer met threshold for clinical 'caseness' on the Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale (RCADS) at follow-up. Discussion: The findings suggest that the intervention was well accepted by young people and feasible to apply within a secondary care setting. Strong effect sizes are encouraging but are probably inflated by the small sample size, uncontrolled design and unblinded assessments.

The efficacy of family interventions in psychosis is well documented. UK and USA schizophrenia treatment guidelines advocate the practice of family interventions within routine clinical services. However, less attention has been paid to the study of treatment fidelity and the tools used in its assessment. This study reports the inter‐rater reliability of a new scale: Family Intervention in Psychosis‐Adherence Scale (FIPAS). This measure is designed to assess therapist adherence to the Kuipers et al. (2002) family intervention in psychosis treatment manual. Reliability ratings were based on a sample of thirteen audiotapes drawn from a randomized controlled trial of family intervention. The results indicated that the majority of items of the FIPAS had acceptable levels of inter‐rater reliability. The findings are discussed in terms of their implications for the training and monitoring of the effectiveness of practitioners for family interventions in psychosis.

This paper reports the psychometric properties of a CBT for psychosis adherence scale, the Revised Cognitive Therapy for Psychosis Adherence Scale (R-CTPAS). The scale's factor structure, inter-rater reliability and concurrent validity were analysed in a sample of 67 audiotaped sessions of CBT for psychosis. The concurrent validity of the scale was examined through comparison with the Cognitive Therapy Scale (CTS, Young and Beck, 1980). Principal components analysis of the trial data suggested three factors: "engagement/assessment work", "relapse prevention work" and "formulation/schema work". Satisfactory levels of inter-rater reliability were established between rater dyads. Moderate correlations with the CTS provided an indication of concurrent validity. The R-CTPAS is concluded to be a reliable and useful instrument that can assess adherence to CBT for psychosis using the Fowler, Garety and Kuipers (1995) therapy model.

Objective: This study compared the practice of cognitive-behavioral therapy ( CBT) for psychosis across research and routine clinical settings. Methods: An observer-rated adherence measure was used to compare the content of 40 therapy sessions of clients with positive psychotic symptoms. Twenty therapist-client dyads came from a research setting in the United Kingdom and 20 from three clinical settings, two in the United Kingdom and one in the United States. In the research setting CBT was provided by research clinical psychologists and trained local therapists. In the clinical settings CBT was part of a case management service by trained therapists. Results: Therapist adherence to CBT for psychosis did not differ between the research and clinical settings. However, clinicians in the research settings scored significantly higher on items for schema work ( z=-1.98, p<.05), relapse prevention interventions ( z=-2.08, p<. 05), and formulating a model of relapse ( z=-2.61, p<. 01). Conclusions: CBT for psychosis conducted in clinical settings was more strongly characterized by assessment of symptoms and work on coping strategies and less so by relapse prevention and schema-level work. Relapse prevention interventions and schema work could be considered more challenging for therapists to undertake. The findings suggest that therapists working in routine clinical settings are able to establish good therapeutic relationships with people with psychosis and to work on assessing and coping with their psychotic symptoms. However, some therapeutic approaches may be more challenging in this context.

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.