Neuropsychiatry in the UK: national survey of existing service provision

Integration of neuroscience into psychiatric training and practice: suggestions for implementation

Mainstream psychiatric practice requires a solid grounding in neuroscience, an important part of the biopsychosocial model, allowing for holistic person-centred care. There have been repeated calls for better integration of neuroscience into training, although so far with less focus on implementation for life-long learning. We suggest that such training should be accessible and utilised by all psychiatrists, not solely those with a special interest in neuropsychiatry. By considering recent positive developments within the general psychiatry curricula and neuropsychiatric resource implementation, we propose strategies for how this can be progressed, minimising regional disparities within the growing world of virtual learning.

Training in neuropsychiatry: views of early career psychiatrists from across the world

BACKGROUND

Training and practice in neuropsychiatry varies across the world. However, little is known about the experiences and opinions of early career psychiatrists (ECPs) across different countries regarding neuropsychiatry.

AIMS AND METHOD

To investigate neuropsychiatry training experiences, practices and opinions among ECPs across different countries. An online survey was distributed to ECPs in 35 countries across the world.

RESULTS

A total of 522 participants took part in this study. Responses show that neuropsychiatry is integrated to a variable extent in psychiatric training curricula across the world. Most respondents were not aware of the existence of neuropsychiatric training or of neuropsychiatric units. Most agreed that training in neuropsychiatry should be done during or after the psychiatry training period. Lack of interest among specialty societies, lack of time during training, and political and economic reasons are regarded as the main barriers.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

These findings call for an improvement in the extent and in the quality of neuropsychiatry training across the world.

Cognitive-behavioural therapy compared with standardised medical care for adults with dissociative non-epileptic seizures: the CODES RCT

BACKGROUND

Dissociative (non-epileptic) seizures are potentially treatable by psychotherapeutic interventions; however, the evidence for this is limited.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of dissociative seizure-specific cognitive-behavioural therapy for adults with dissociative seizures.

DESIGN

This was a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel-arm, mixed-methods randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

This took place in 27 UK-based neurology/epilepsy services, 17 liaison psychiatry/neuropsychiatry services and 18 cognitive-behavioural therapy services.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults with dissociative seizures in the previous 8 weeks and no epileptic seizures in the previous year and meeting other eligibility criteria were recruited to a screening phase from neurology/epilepsy services between October 2014 and February 2017. After psychiatric assessment around 3 months later, eligible and interested participants were randomised between January 2015 and May 2017.

INTERVENTIONS

Standardised medical care consisted of input from neurologists and psychiatrists who were given guidance regarding diagnosis delivery and management; they provided patients with information booklets. The intervention consisted of 12 dissociative seizure-specific cognitive-behavioural therapy 1-hour sessions (plus one booster session) that were delivered by trained therapists, in addition to standardised medical care.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was monthly seizure frequency at 12 months post randomisation. The secondary outcomes were aspects of seizure occurrence, quality of life, mood, anxiety, distress, symptoms, psychosocial functioning, clinical global change, satisfaction with treatment, quality-adjusted life-years, costs and cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

In total, 698 patients were screened and 368 were randomised (standardised medical care alone, n = 182; and cognitive-behavioural therapy plus standardised medical care, n = 186). Primary outcome data were obtained for 85% of participants. An intention-to-treat analysis with multivariate imputation by chained equations revealed no significant between-group difference in dissociative seizure frequency at 12 months [standardised medical care: median of seven dissociative seizures (interquartile range 1-35 dissociative seizures); cognitive-behavioural therapy and standardised medical care: median of four dissociative seizures (interquartile range 0-20 dissociative seizures); incidence rate ratio 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.56 to 1.09; p = 0.144]. Of the 16 secondary outcomes analysed, nine were significantly better in the arm receiving cognitive-behavioural therapy at a p-value < 0.05, including the following at a p-value ≤ 0.001: the longest dissociative seizure-free period in months 7-12 inclusive post randomisation (incidence rate ratio 1.64, 95% confidence interval 1.22 to 2.20; p = 0.001); better psychosocial functioning (Work and Social Adjustment Scale, standardised treatment effect -0.39, 95% confidence interval -0.61 to -0.18; p < 0.001); greater self-rated and clinician-rated clinical improvement (self-rated: standardised treatment effect 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.16 to 0.62; p = 0.001; clinician rated: standardised treatment effect 0.37, 95% confidence interval 0.17 to 0.57; p < 0.001); and satisfaction with treatment (standardised treatment effect 0.50, 95% confidence interval 0.27 to 0.73; p < 0.001). Rates of adverse events were similar across arms. Cognitive-behavioural therapy plus standardised medical care produced 0.0152 more quality-adjusted life-years (95% confidence interval -0.0106 to 0.0392 quality-adjusted life-years) than standardised medical care alone. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (cost per quality-adjusted life-year) for cognitive-behavioural therapy plus standardised medical care versus standardised medical care alone based on the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version, and imputed data was £120,658. In sensitivity analyses, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged between £85,724 and £206,067. Qualitative and quantitative process evaluations highlighted useful study components, the importance of clinical experience in treating patients with dissociative seizures and potential benefits of our multidisciplinary care pathway.

LIMITATIONS

Unlike outcome assessors, participants and clinicians were not blinded to the interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant additional benefit of dissociative seizure-specific cognitive-behavioural therapy in reducing dissociative seizure frequency, and cost-effectiveness over standardised medical care was low. However, this large, adequately powered, multicentre randomised controlled trial highlights benefits of adjunctive dissociative seizure-specific cognitive-behavioural therapy for several clinical outcomes, with no evidence of greater harm from dissociative seizure-specific cognitive-behavioural therapy.

FUTURE WORK

Examination of moderators and mediators of outcome.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN05681227 and ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02325544.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 43. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Exploring psychiatrists' perspectives of working with patients with dissociative seizures in the UK healthcare system as part of the CODES trial: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

There is currently limited research exploring healthcare professionals' (HCPs) experiences of working with patients with dissociative seizures (DS). Existing studies do not focus on the role of psychiatrists in treating this complex condition. The objective of this study was to gain an understanding of UK-based psychiatrists' experiences of the DS patient group. Against the backdrop of a UK-wide randomised controlled trial (RCT), the focus was broadened to encompass issues arising in everyday practice with the DS patient group.

DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS

A qualitative study using semistructured interviews was undertaken with 10 psychiatrists currently working with DS patients within the context of a large RCT investigating treatments for DS. Thematic analysis was used to identify key themes and subthemes.

SETTING

The psychiatrists were working in Liaison or Neuropsychiatry services in England.

RESULTS

The key themes identified were other HCPs' attitudes to DS and the challenges of the DS patient group. There is a clear knowledge gap regarding DS for many HCPs and other clinical services can be reluctant to take referrals for this patient group. Important challenges posed by this patient group included avoidance (of difficult emotions and help), alexithymia and interpersonal difficulties. Difficulties with alexithymia meant DS patients could struggle to identify triggers for their seizures and to express their emotions. Interpersonal difficulties raised included difficulties in attachment with both HCPs and family members.

CONCLUSIONS

A knowledge gap for HCPs regarding DS has been identified and needs to be addressed to improve patient care. Given the complexity of the patient group and that clinicians from multiple disciplines will come into contact with DS patients, it is essential for any educational strategy to be implemented across the whole range of specialties, and to account for those already in practice as well as future trainees.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN05681227; NCT02325544; Pre-results.

Neuropsychiatry in the UK: planning the service provision for the 21st century

Some believe that Cartesian dualism of mind and body in the 19th century and the rise of psychoanalysis by the turn of the 20th century was what led to the separation of neurology and psychiatry. More recently, conceptualisations of the mind/brain paradigm have helped rediscover the relationship between the mind and the brain, bringing renewed synergy between neurology and psychiatry (Cunningham et al, 2006). However, division is still apparent in current service planning and provision in the UK for individuals whose presentation lies in the no-man's-land between these two historical domains.

COgnitive behavioural therapy versus standardised medical care for adults with Dissociative non-Epileptic Seizures (CODES): statistical and economic analysis plan for a randomised controlled trial

Background

Dissociative seizures (DSs), also called psychogenic non-epileptic seizures, are a distressing and disabling problem for many patients in neurological settings with high and often unnecessary economic costs. The COgnitive behavioural therapy versus standardised medical care for adults with Dissociative non-Epileptic Seizures (CODES) trial is an evaluation of a specifically tailored psychological intervention with the aims of reducing seizure frequency and severity and improving psychological well-being in adults with DS. The aim of this paper is to report in detail the quantitative and economic analysis plan for the CODES trial, as agreed by the trial steering committee.

Methods

The CODES trial is a multicentre, pragmatic, parallel group, randomised controlled trial performed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of 13 sessions of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) plus standardised medical care (SMC) compared with SMC alone for adult outpatients with DS.

Discussion

The objectives and design of the trial are summarised, and the aims and procedures of the planned analyses are illustrated. The proposed analysis plan addresses statistical considerations such as maintaining blinding, monitoring adherence with the protocol, describing aspects of treatment and dealing with missing data. The formal analysis approach for the primary and secondary outcomes is described, as are the descriptive statistics that will be reported. This paper provides transparency to the planned inferential analyses for the CODES trial prior to the extraction of outcome data. It also provides an update to the previously published trial protocol and guidance to those conducting similar trials.

Trial registration

ISRCTN registry ISRCTN05681227 (registered on 5 March 2014); ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02325544 (registered on 15 December 2014).

COgnitive behavioural therapy vs standardised medical care for adults with Dissociative non-Epileptic Seizures (CODES): a multicentre randomised controlled trial protocol

BACKGROUND

The evidence base for the effectiveness of psychological interventions for patients with dissociative non-epileptic seizures (DS) is currently extremely limited, although data from two small pilot randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including from our group, suggest that Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) may be effective in reducing DS occurrence and may improve aspects of psychological status and psychosocial functioning.

METHODS/DESIGN

The study is a multicentre, pragmatic parallel group RCT to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of specifically-tailored CBT plus standardised medical care (SMC) vs SMC alone in reducing DS frequency and improving psychological and health-related outcomes. In the initial screening phase, patients with DS will receive their diagnosis from a neurologist/epilepsy specialist. If patients are eligible and interested following the provision of study information and a booklet about DS, they will consent to provide demographic information and fortnightly data about their seizures, and agree to see a psychiatrist three months later. We aim to recruit ~500 patients to this screening stage. After a review three months later by a psychiatrist, those patients who have continued to have DS in the previous eight weeks and who meet further eligibility criteria will be told about the trial comparing CBT + SMC vs SMC alone. If they are interested in participating, they will be given a further booklet on DS and study information. A research worker will see them to obtain their informed consent to take part in the RCT. We aim to randomise 298 people (149 to each arm). In addition to a baseline assessment, data will be collected at 6 and 12 months post randomisation. Our primary outcome is monthly seizure frequency in the preceding month. Secondary outcomes include seizure severity, measures of seizure freedom and reduction, psychological distress and psychosocial functioning, quality of life, health service use, cost effectiveness and adverse events. We will include a nested qualitative study to evaluate participants' views of the intervention and factors that acted as facilitators and barriers to participation.

DISCUSSION

This study will be the first adequately powered evaluation of CBT for this patient group and offers the potential to provide an evidence base for treating this patient group.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN05681227 ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02325544.

Neurology and psychiatry as one medical discipline

The British Neuropsychiatry Association XXVII Annual General Meeting, Institute of Child Health, London, UK, 27–28 February 2014

The British Neuropsychiatry Association held its 27th Annual General Meeting in London, UK, on 27–28 February 2014. With 240 registered delegates, this was one of the largest forums for researchers and practitioners with an interest in neuropsychiatry in the UK. The two-day event included a series of plenary lectures and presentations from both British Neuropsychiatry Association members and invited speakers. Day 1 focused on the new developments in cognition, whereas day 2 was devoted to the neuropsychiatric aspects of encephalitis and autoimmunity. The meeting closed with a thought-provoking debate: ‘This house believes that neurology and psychiatry should be one medical discipline’.

The evolving discipline and services of neuropsychiatry in the United Kingdom

BACKGROUND

The last few decades have seen a renaissance in the development of neuropsychiatric services on a global scale.

METHODS

This paper reviews the existing literature on the changing role of the clinical neuropsychiatrist and discusses the evolving theory and practice of neuropsychiatry in the United Kingdom.

RESULTS

The rapidly evolving specialty of neuropsychiatry is currently facing a number of challenges. These include, but are not limited to, uncertainties about the curricular requirements for clinical neuropsychiatrists and the changing roles within the wider scenario of health-care service provision.

DISCUSSION

An informed historical perspective on this multifaceted discipline allows key insights into its future development.