Prodromal Schizophrenia, Psychological Disorder, Psychological Stress, Psychosis
Conditions
Keywords
early intervention, lifestyle intervention, clinical high risk for psychosis, health behavior
Brief summary
The present study will assess the feasibility and social validity of an adjunctive health promotion group for youth and clinical high risk for psychosis (CHR-P). Youth participating in treatment at the Center for the Assessment and Prevention of Prodromal Sates (CAPPS) will be invited to participate in a weekly, adjunctive, closed psychoeducation group focused on sharing health promotion strategies and increasing health behaviors (e.g. improved sleep habits, increased participation in physical activity). The aim of the group will be to provide psychoeducation on lifestyle risk and protective factors for youth at risk for psychosis (i.e. experiencing subthreshold psychosis symptoms). Topics covered will include psychoeducation, goal setting, stress management, sleep, physical activity, substance use, and nutrition. Evidence-based strategies to decrease risk factors and promote protective lifestyle factors for mental illness will be reviewed. Group leaders will utilize a motivational interviewing approach to facilitate the group. The group will complete nine weekly group sessions. The goal of our research is to 1) determine the feasibility of a novel group-based health promotion intervention, 2) assess the social validity of the group, 3) measure the effects of the intervention on stress, sleep, physical activity, substance use, and nutrition, and 4) measure preliminary effects on symptoms and functioning.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALHealth Behaviors Group
The proposed intervention will include eight modules across nine weekly group sessions targeting psychoeducation of CHR-P symptoms, goal setting, physical activity, sleep, substance use, nutrition, and evidence-based strategies for stress management. Intervention facilitators will utilize motivational interviewing (MI; Miller & Rollnick, 2012) strategies to engage youth in goal setting to target change in health promotion behaviors. Caregivers will be invited to join at the end of each session for a 10-minute check-out where an outline of content covered and patient goals for the week will be shared.
Sponsors
University of California, Los Angeles
Study design
Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
NONE
Intervention model description
One group of 12 participants identified as at clinical high-risk for psychosis (CHR-P) will be recruited to participate in a 9-week health behavior promotion/lifestyle intervention.
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
13 Years to 17 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
1. between 13 and 17 years old 2. able to sign and provide informed consent (assent for minors) 3. meet criteria for CHR-P using the Structured Interview for Psychosis-Risk Syndromes (SIPS). 4. Must have a primary caregiver willing to participate who speaks fluent English
Exclusion criteria
1. current or lifetime DSM-5 psychotic disorder 2. impaired intellectual functioning (IQ \<65) 3. history of neurological disorder 4. traumatic brain injury (≥7 on TBI screening tool) 5. significant substance use that makes CHR-P diagnosis ambiguous
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change Sleep Habits | Change from baseline (pre-intervention) to 9- week post-intervention | Sleep will be assessed via self-report on the PROMIS Pediatric Sleep Disturbance scale (Buysse, et al., 2010). The Pediatric Sleep Disturbance Scale consists of 15 items rated 1 = Never, 2 = Almost Never, 3 = Sometimes, 4 = Almost Always, and 5 = Always, with a higher score indicating more sleep disturbance. |
| Participant Recruitment and Retention | Across Intervention: 9 weeks | Feasibility will be measured by recruitment (participants approached/ participants enrolled) and retention (participants enrolled/ participants completed at least two-thirds of the intervention). Feasibility data will be summarized by the percent recruited, the percent retained by group and the mean and median number of sessions attended by group. The percent who attended each session by group over time will also be reported. Good feasibility will be defined as 70% of those enrolled completing at least two-thirds of the intervention (6 sessions). |
| Change in Physical Activity | Change from baseline (pre-intervention) to 9- week post-intervention | The mean profile from baseline to post-treatment for physical activity as assessed by the International Physical Activity Questionnaire - Short Form (IPAQ-SF; Craig et al., 2017). Activity levels will be self-report. |
| Change in Diet | Change from baseline (pre-intervention) to 9- week post-intervention | Change in diet will be measured on the ASA24. This dietary assessment uses 24-hour recall to assess nutrition quality and provides measure of total energy intake and macronutrients. |
| Change in Subjective Stress | Change from baseline (pre-intervention) to 9- week post-intervention | Participant subjective stress will be assessed via the 10-item self-report Perceived Stress Scale ( PSS; Cohen et al., 1983).The PSS consists of 10 items rated 0= Never to 4= Very Often, with a higher score suggesting more stress. |
| Change in Substance Use | Change from baseline (pre-intervention) to 9- week post-intervention | Alcohol and drug use will be measured by clinician rated on the Alcohol Use Scale and Drug Use Scale (AUS/DUS; Drake et al., 1996). This measure rates frequency and impairment associated with alcohol and drug use. Alcohol and drug use are rated on both frequency (0= no use to 5= almost daily) and impairment (0= abstinent to 5= dependence with institutionalization). A rating of 3 or higher on impairment corresponds with substance use disorder. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Social Validity as assessed by the Semi-Structured Interview for Social Validation | 9-week post-intervention | The social validity of the intervention will be described qualitatively using a modified version of the Semi-Structured Interview for Social Validation. This interview measure includes questions directed at assessing the significance of the goals of the intervention, the acceptability of the procedures used, and the importance of the effects of the intervention. A thematic analysis procedure will be utilized for qualitative analysis of the interviews. |
Countries
United States
Outcome results
None listed