Project description:BackgroundYoung people are disproportionately more likely than other age groups to use substances. The rise in substance use and related harms, including overdose, during the Covid-19 pandemic has created a critical need for more innovative and accessible substance use interventions. Digital interventions have shown effectiveness and can provide more engaging, less stigmatizing, and accessible interventions that meet the needs of young people. This review provides an overview of recent literature on the nature of recently published digital interventions for young people in terms of technologies used, substances targeted, intended outcomes and theoretical or therapeutic models employed.MethodsRapid review methodology was used to identify and assess the literature on digital interventions for young people. An initial keyword search was conducted using MEDLINE the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Health Technology Assessment Database (HTA) and PROSPERO for the years 2015-2020, and later updated to December 2021. Following a title/abstract and full-text screening of articles, and consensus decision on study inclusion, the data extraction process proceeded using an extraction grid developed for the study. Data synthesis relied on an adapted conceptual framework by Stockings, et al. that involved a three-level treatment spectrum for youth substance use (prevention, early intervention, and treatment) for any type of substance.ResultsIn total, the review identified 43 articles describing 39 different digital interventions. Most were early interventions (n = 28), followed by prevention interventions (n = 6) and treatment interventions (n = 5). The identified digital technologies included web-based (n = 14), game-based (n = 10), mobile-based (n = 7), and computer-based (n = 5) technologies, and virtual reality (n = 3). Most interventions targeted alcohol use (n = 20) followed by tobacco/nicotine (n = 5), cannabis (n = 2), opioids (n = 2), ketamine (1) and multiple, or any substances (n = 9). Most interventions used a personalized or normative feedback approach and aimed to effect behaviour change as the intended outcome. Interestingly, a harm reduction approach guided only one of the 39 interventions.ConclusionsWhile web-based interventions represented the most common type of technology, more recently developed immersive and interactive technologies such as virtual reality and game-based interventions call for further exploration. Digital interventions focused mainly on alcohol use, reflecting less concern for tobacco, cannabis, co-occurring substance use, and illicit drug use. Specifically, the recent exacerbation in the opioid crisis throughout North American underlines the urgent need for more prevention-oriented digital interventions for opioid use. The uptake of digital interventions among youth also depends on the incorporation of harm reduction approaches.
Project description:BACKGROUND:The development and evaluation of digital interventions aimed at preventing or treating substance use-related problems and disorders is a rapidly growing field. Previous reviews of such interventions reveal a large and complex picture with regard to targeted users, use, and efficacy. OBJECTIVE:The objective of this review was to investigate the feasibility and effects of interventions developed specifically for digital platforms. These interventions are focused on supporting people in recovery from substance use disorders by helping them achieve their substance use goals and develop a more satisfying life situation. METHODS:The review is based on a systematic search in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, and Cochrane Library databases. Of the 1149 identified articles, 722 were excluded as obviously not relevant. Of the remaining articles, 21 were found to be previous reviews, 269 were on interventions aimed at reducing hazardous alcohol or cannabis use, and 94 were on digitized versions of standard treatment methods. The remaining 43 articles were all read in full and systematically scored by both authors. RESULTS:The 43 articles cover 28 unique interventions, of which 33 have been published after 2013. The interventions are aimed at different target groups (defined by age, substance, or comorbidity). Based on the number of features or modules, the interventions can be categorized as simple or complex. Fourteen of the 18 simple interventions and 9 of the 10 complex interventions have been studied with quantitative controlled methodologies. Thirteen of the 18 simple interventions are integrated in other treatment or support systems, mainly delivered as mobile phone apps, while 6 of the 10 complex interventions are designed as stand-alone interventions, most often delivered on a platform combining desktop/Web and mobile phone technologies. The interventions were generally easy to implement, but in most cases the implementation of the complex interventions was found to be dependent on sustained organizational support. Between 70% and 90% of the participants found the interventions to be useful and easy to use. The rates of sustained use were also generally high, except for simple interventions with an open internet-based recruitment and some information and education modules of the complex interventions. Across all interventions, slightly more than half (55%) of the studies with control groups generated positive findings on 1 or more substance use outcomes, with 57% of the interventions also found to be efficacious in 1 or more studies. In the positive studies, effects were typically in the small to moderate range, with a few studies yielding larger effects. Largely due to the inclusion of stronger control conditions, studies of simple interventions were less likely to produce positive effects. CONCLUSIONS:The digital interventions included in this review are in general feasible but are not consistently effective in helping people in recovery from substance use disorder reduce their substance use or achieving other recovery goals.
Project description:BackgroundRecovery-supportive interventions and strategies for people with substance use disorders are a cornerstone of the emergent recovery paradigm. As compared to other services, such approaches have been shown to be holistically focused and improve outcomes (e.g. substance use, supportive relationships, social functioning, and well-being). Even so, a comprehensive overview of the nature, extent, and range of research on the topic is lacking.MethodsA scoping review of the literature was conducted to characterize the main topics on recovery-supportive interventions. A systematic search was conducted in three databases: Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed from January 2000 to July 2023 using the PRISMA-ScR. Twenty-five studies published between 2005-2022 met the inclusion criteria.ResultsMost studies emanated from the United States, and we found a peak in publication frequency between 2018-2022 (n = 13) relative to other years. The most prominent lines of inquiry appear to concern recovery-oriented policies; principles of recovery-oriented services (challenges encountered when implementing recovery-oriented practices, relationships with service providers characterized by trust, and service user-service provider collaboration), and recovery capital (particularly recovery-supportive networks, employment, and housing). Seventeen studies addressed co-occurring disorders, and eight addressed substance use recovery.ConclusionTo advance the field, more context-specific studies are required on supporting peer professionals, (including enabling cooperation with service users, and hiring experts by experience as staff), and training of professionals (e.g., nurses, psychologists, social workers, physicians) in the principles of recovery.
Project description:Addictive substances are prevalent world-wide, and their use presents a substantial and persistent public health problem. A wide range of digital interventions to decrease use and negative consequences thereof have been explored, differing in approach, theoretical grounding, use of specific technologies, and more. The current study was designed to comprehensively map the recent (2015-2022) extant literature in a systematic manner, and to identify neglected and emerging knowledge gaps. Four major databases (Medline, Web of Science Core Collection, and PsychInfo) were searched using database-specific search strategies, combining terms related to clinical presentation (alcohol, tobacco or other drug use), technology and aim. After deduplication, the remaining n=13,917 unique studies published were manually screened in two stages, leaving a final n=3,056 studies, the abstracts of which were subjected to a tailored coding scheme. Findings revealed an accelerating rate of publications in this field, with randomized trials being the most common study type. Several meta-analyses on the topic have now been published, revealing promising and robust effects. Digital interventions are being offered on numerous levels, from targeted prevention to specialized clinics. Detailed coding was at times made difficult by inconsistent use of specific terms, which has important implications for future meta-analyses. Moreover, we identify several gaps in the extant literature - few health economic assessments, unclear descriptions of interventions, weak meta-analytic support for some type of interventions, and limited research on many target groups, settings and new interventions like video calls, chatbots and artificial intelligence - that we argue are important to address in future research.
Project description:BackgroundPsychotic disorders are commonly accompanied by intense psychological burden, and psychological interventions are usually needed in order to reduce the symptoms and help in maintaining or improving the level of psychological and social functioning after the onset of psychosis. The evidence-base for treating young people at risk for psychosis and adults with psychotic disorders is accumulating. Yet, pervasive systematic literature reviews that would include patients from the full age range being the most essential period for the risk of developing a psychotic disorder, a wide range of psychological interventions, and various types of clinical trials, have been lacking. The aim of this systematic review is to fill the gap by presenting the current research evidence from clinical trials on the effectiveness of psychological interventions for treating young people (12-30) with psychotic disorders.MethodsA systematic search was conducted in PubMed and PsycINFO followed by a 3-step screening process based on the PICOS strategy. Risk of bias of the included studies was assessed by the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). Extracted data from the included studies is reported using a narrative synthesis.ResultsOf the 1,449 publications screened, 40 from 25 studies were included in the review. Of these, 10 studies reported results from cognitive or behavioral therapy, nine from cognitive remediation therapy (CRT), and six from other types of therapies (i.e., integrative interventions combining psychoeducation and family/group interventions). All but one study found the target interventions to be effective, but the results mostly did not differ significantly from the control conditions in reducing symptoms and improving functioning, preventing relapses and hospitalization, or improving psychological or family variables. The most consistent findings were from CRT, showing more improvement in cognitive functioning compared to control conditions while not being superior in reducing symptom severity. Integrative interventions might be effective in treating young people suffering from psychotic disorders.ConclusionThere is some evidence that psychological interventions are effective for young people with psychotic disorders. However, with regard to symptom severity, psychotherapy does not outperform control conditions, and the results do not strongly favor any specific type of treatment.Systematic review registration[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020166756], identifier [CRD42020166756].
Project description:BackgroundSevere mental disorders - such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and substance use disorders - exert a negative impact not only on affected people but also on their carers. To support carers of people with severe mental disorders, several psychosocial interventions have been developed.MethodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess whether psychosocial interventions for carers of persons with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, or substance use disorders produce benefit/harm with respect to a series of outcomes - including subjective and objective burden, depressive symptoms, well-being/quality of life, sleep, skills/knowledge, self-efficacy, physical health - as compared to standard support/support as usual or other control conditions.ResultsIn carers of persons with schizophrenia, psychoeducational interventions were associated with significant improvement in personal burden, well-being, and knowledge about the illness; and a supportive-educational intervention with an improvement in personal burden. In carers of persons with bipolar disorder, psychoeducational interventions were associated with significant improvement in personal burden and depressive symptoms; family-led supportive interventions with an improvement in family burden; family-focused intervention and online "mi.spot" intervention with a significant reduction in depressive symptoms. Psychosocial interventions used for carers of persons with substance use disorders were found to be overall effective on the level of well-being, but the low number of trials did not allow detection of differences between the various psychosocial interventions.ConclusionsThe quality of the evidence ranged from very low to moderate, suggesting the need for further better-quality research.
Project description:INTRODUCTION:People with serious mental illness (SMI) and/or substance use disorders (SUDs) have an elevated risk of premature mortality compared with the general population. This has been attributed to higher rates of chronic illness among these individuals, but also to inequities in healthcare access and treatment. Integrated care has the potential to improve the health of people with SMI/SUDs. The aims of this scoping review are to: (1) identify empirical investigations of interventions designed to integrate care for people with SMI/SUDs; (2) describe the underlying theories, models and frameworks of integrated care that informed their development; and (3) determine the degree to which interventions address dimensions of a comprehensive and validated framework of integrated care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:Guidelines for best practice and reporting of scoping reviews will be followed using the framework of Arksey and O'Malley and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses scoping review checklist. An iterative and systematic search of peer-reviewed publications reporting empirical research findings will be conducted. This literature will be identified by searching five databases: Medline (Ovid), PsycINFO, CINAHL, Embase (Ovid) and Scopus. The search will be restricted to articles published between January 2000 and April 2019. Two reviewers will independently screen publications in two successive stages of title and abstract screening, followed by full-text screening of eligible publications. A tabular summary and narrative synthesis will be completed using data extracted from each included study. A framework synthesis will also be conducted, with descriptions of interventions mapped against a theoretical framework of integrated care. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:This review will identify the extent and nature of empirical investigations evaluating interventions to integrate care for people with SMI/SUDs. Ethical approval was not required. A team of relevant stakeholders, including people with lived experience of mental health conditions, has been established. This team will be engaged throughout the review and will ensure that the findings are widely disseminated. Dissemination will include publication of the review in a peer-reviewed journal. The review protocol has been registered through Open Science Framework and can be accessed at https://osf.io/njkph/.
Project description:BackgroundSubstance use disorder (SUD), mental health disorders (MHD), and co-occurring mental health and substance use disorders are common among criminal justice populations. Digital health interventions (DHI) represent an opportunity to expand co-occurring disorder treatment for justice involved populations, but efficacy data are lacking.ObjectivesThe current scoping review aims to address this gap via following objectives: (1) Describe trends involving DHIs for MHD, SUD, or co-occurring disorders studied in criminal justice settings; and (2) review available evidence for the impact of DHIs on criminal justice-, substance-, and mental health-related outcomes.MethodsPubMed was searched for relevant articles that met the follow inclusion criteria: (1) focus on criminal justice-involved individuals; (2) description of an intervention focused on SUD, MHD, or co-occurring disorders; and (3) use of DHI. Articles were assessed using standardized data abstraction and quality assessment tools.ResultsFour-hundred unique articles were identified on initial search, and 19 were included in the final review. The most common focus of the intervention was SUDs. The most common modalities were telehealth and computer assisted interventions, with most utilized as an adjunct to treatment as usual. No DHIs used wearable devices, and one included justice involved youth. Feasibility and acceptability were high, and the studies that measured substance and mental health-related outcomes reported equivocal or positive results. No studies focused on long-term justice-related outcomes.ConclusionsLiterature on DHIs for criminal justice involved populations diagnosed with SUD, MHD and co-occurring disorders is limited, and largely focuses on telehealth or eHealth, with less data on mHealth approaches. Future research should focus on the inclusion of diverse populations and include objective monitoring tools.
Project description:IntroductionMany children fail to receive the mental health treatments they need, despite strong evidence demonstrating efficacy of brief and low-intensity psychological interventions. This review identifies the barriers and facilitators to their implementation.Sources of dataPsycInfo, EMBASE and Medline were searched and a systematic approach to data extraction using Normalization Process Theory highlighted key mechanisms and contextual factors.Areas of agreementTen interventions from 9 papers, including 371 young people, were included. Studies identified organizational demands, lack of implementation strategy and stigma as barriers to implementation, and clear training and plans for implementation as facilitators.Areas of controversyNo standardized implementation outcomes were used across papers so meta-analysis was not possible.Growing pointsBarriers and facilitators have been clearly identified across different settings.Areas timely for developing researchLongitudinal studies can identify methods and processes for enhancing long-term implementation and considers ways to monitor and evaluate uptake into routine practice.