The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Comparison of a theoretically driven cognitive therapy (the Feeling Safe Programme) with befriending for the treatment of persistent persecutory delusions: a parallel, single-blind, randomised controlled trial

Comparison of a theoretically driven cognitive therapy (the Feeling Safe Programme) with befriending for the treatment of persistent persecutory delusions: a parallel, single-blind, randomised controlled trial
Comparison of a theoretically driven cognitive therapy (the Feeling Safe Programme) with befriending for the treatment of persistent persecutory delusions: a parallel, single-blind, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: There is a large clinical need for improved treatments for patients with persecutory delusions. We aimed to test whether a new theoretically driven cognitive therapy (the Feeling Safe Programme) would lead to large reductions in persecutory delusions, above non-specific effects of therapy. We also aimed to test treatment effect mechanisms.

METHODS: We did a parallel, single-blind, randomised controlled trial to test the Feeling Safe Programme against befriending with the same therapists for patients with persistent persecutory delusions in the context of non-affective psychosis diagnoses. Usual care continued throughout the duration of the trial. The trial took place in community mental health services in three UK National Health Service trusts. Participants were included if they were 16 years or older, had persecutory delusions (as defined by Freeman and Garety) for at least 3 months and held with at least 60% conviction, and had a primary diagnosis of non-affective psychosis from the referring clinical team. Patients were randomly assigned to either the Feeling Safe Programme or the befriending programme, using a permuted blocks algorithm with randomly varying block size, stratified by therapist. Trial assessors were masked to group allocation. If an allocation was unmasked then the unmasked assessor was replaced with a new masked assessor. Outcomes were assessed at 0 months, 6 months (primary endpoint), and 12 months. The primary outcome was persecutory delusion conviction, assessed within the Psychotic Symptoms Rating Scale (PSYRATS; rated 0-100%). Outcome analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. Each intervention was provided individually over 6 months. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN18705064.

FINDINGS: From Feb 8, 2016, to July 26, 2019, 130 patients with persecutory delusions (78 [60%] men; 52 [40%] women, mean age 42 years [SD 12·1, range 17-71]; 86% White, 9% Black, 2% Indian; 2·3% Pakistani; 2% other) were recruited. 64 patients were randomly allocated to the Feeling Safe Programme and 66 patients to befriending. Compared with befriending, the Feeling Safe Programme led to significant end of treatment reductions in delusional conviction (-10·69 [95% CI -19·75 to -1·63], p=0·021, Cohen's d=-0·86) and delusion severity (PSYRATS, -2·94 [-4·58 to -1·31], p<0·0001, Cohen's d=-1·20). More adverse events occurred in the befriending group (68 unrelated adverse events reported in 20 [30%] participants) compared with the Feeling Safe group (53 unrelated adverse events reported in 16 [25%] participants).

INTERPRETATION: The Feeling Safe Programme led to a significant reduction in persistent persecutory delusions compared with befriending. To our knowledge, these are the largest treatment effects seen for patients with persistent delusions. The principal limitation of our trial was the relatively small sample size when comparing two active treatments, meaning less precision in effect size estimates and lower power to detect moderate treatment differences in secondary outcomes. Further research could be done to determine whether greater effects could be possible by reducing the hypothesised delusion maintenance mechanisms further. The Feeling Safe Programme could become the recommended psychological treatment in clinical services for persecutory delusions.

FUNDING: NIHR Research Professorship and NIHR Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre.

Adult, Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Delusions/therapy, Female, Friends/psychology, Humans, Male, Psychotic Disorders/therapy, State Medicine, United Kingdom
2215-0366
696-707
Freeman, Daniel
1aaed991-d5f1-4ac6-9f10-63a85ef15393
Emsley, Richard
befe7b94-728c-47aa-84db-4f066d5f4836
Diamond, Rowan
060db6ce-1bef-4ee1-9ba1-23474a2739d9
Collett, Nicola
b9e09a88-732b-4e6b-826a-302a5c7aca7a
Bold, Emily
f6db6845-f448-4358-b6f0-188f4ded3f13
Chadwick, Eleanor
6b13c192-d3d1-4764-bd76-dba7911ad516
Isham, Louise
92d8fca3-2d70-4d34-9f1d-41c9c25fbe94
Bird, Jessica C
a2a2e075-eb55-4791-9b9c-caf0ef0aa22e
Edwards, Danielle
7b28a32d-a75d-4296-9bec-0aa3e472d9eb
Kingdon, David
14cdc422-10b4-4b2d-88ec-24fde5f4329b
Fitzpatrick, Ray
e8a93c39-1f5e-4a7d-bfc2-77cf6dd7435f
Kabir, Thomas
0fedfd4b-d610-4838-9e58-1573a6b9b86a
Waite, Felicity
2049f85c-0b07-468d-b254-ac8cd04e90c9
Oxford Cognitive Approaches to Psychosis Trial Study Group
Freeman, Daniel
1aaed991-d5f1-4ac6-9f10-63a85ef15393
Emsley, Richard
befe7b94-728c-47aa-84db-4f066d5f4836
Diamond, Rowan
060db6ce-1bef-4ee1-9ba1-23474a2739d9
Collett, Nicola
b9e09a88-732b-4e6b-826a-302a5c7aca7a
Bold, Emily
f6db6845-f448-4358-b6f0-188f4ded3f13
Chadwick, Eleanor
6b13c192-d3d1-4764-bd76-dba7911ad516
Isham, Louise
92d8fca3-2d70-4d34-9f1d-41c9c25fbe94
Bird, Jessica C
a2a2e075-eb55-4791-9b9c-caf0ef0aa22e
Edwards, Danielle
7b28a32d-a75d-4296-9bec-0aa3e472d9eb
Kingdon, David
14cdc422-10b4-4b2d-88ec-24fde5f4329b
Fitzpatrick, Ray
e8a93c39-1f5e-4a7d-bfc2-77cf6dd7435f
Kabir, Thomas
0fedfd4b-d610-4838-9e58-1573a6b9b86a
Waite, Felicity
2049f85c-0b07-468d-b254-ac8cd04e90c9

Freeman, Daniel, Emsley, Richard and Diamond, Rowan , Oxford Cognitive Approaches to Psychosis Trial Study Group (2021) Comparison of a theoretically driven cognitive therapy (the Feeling Safe Programme) with befriending for the treatment of persistent persecutory delusions: a parallel, single-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Psychiatry, 8 (8), 696-707. (doi:10.1016/S2215-0366(21)00158-9).

Record type: Article

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is a large clinical need for improved treatments for patients with persecutory delusions. We aimed to test whether a new theoretically driven cognitive therapy (the Feeling Safe Programme) would lead to large reductions in persecutory delusions, above non-specific effects of therapy. We also aimed to test treatment effect mechanisms.

METHODS: We did a parallel, single-blind, randomised controlled trial to test the Feeling Safe Programme against befriending with the same therapists for patients with persistent persecutory delusions in the context of non-affective psychosis diagnoses. Usual care continued throughout the duration of the trial. The trial took place in community mental health services in three UK National Health Service trusts. Participants were included if they were 16 years or older, had persecutory delusions (as defined by Freeman and Garety) for at least 3 months and held with at least 60% conviction, and had a primary diagnosis of non-affective psychosis from the referring clinical team. Patients were randomly assigned to either the Feeling Safe Programme or the befriending programme, using a permuted blocks algorithm with randomly varying block size, stratified by therapist. Trial assessors were masked to group allocation. If an allocation was unmasked then the unmasked assessor was replaced with a new masked assessor. Outcomes were assessed at 0 months, 6 months (primary endpoint), and 12 months. The primary outcome was persecutory delusion conviction, assessed within the Psychotic Symptoms Rating Scale (PSYRATS; rated 0-100%). Outcome analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. Each intervention was provided individually over 6 months. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN18705064.

FINDINGS: From Feb 8, 2016, to July 26, 2019, 130 patients with persecutory delusions (78 [60%] men; 52 [40%] women, mean age 42 years [SD 12·1, range 17-71]; 86% White, 9% Black, 2% Indian; 2·3% Pakistani; 2% other) were recruited. 64 patients were randomly allocated to the Feeling Safe Programme and 66 patients to befriending. Compared with befriending, the Feeling Safe Programme led to significant end of treatment reductions in delusional conviction (-10·69 [95% CI -19·75 to -1·63], p=0·021, Cohen's d=-0·86) and delusion severity (PSYRATS, -2·94 [-4·58 to -1·31], p<0·0001, Cohen's d=-1·20). More adverse events occurred in the befriending group (68 unrelated adverse events reported in 20 [30%] participants) compared with the Feeling Safe group (53 unrelated adverse events reported in 16 [25%] participants).

INTERPRETATION: The Feeling Safe Programme led to a significant reduction in persistent persecutory delusions compared with befriending. To our knowledge, these are the largest treatment effects seen for patients with persistent delusions. The principal limitation of our trial was the relatively small sample size when comparing two active treatments, meaning less precision in effect size estimates and lower power to detect moderate treatment differences in secondary outcomes. Further research could be done to determine whether greater effects could be possible by reducing the hypothesised delusion maintenance mechanisms further. The Feeling Safe Programme could become the recommended psychological treatment in clinical services for persecutory delusions.

FUNDING: NIHR Research Professorship and NIHR Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 8 July 2021
Additional Information: Acknowledgments The study was funded by a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) research professorship awarded to DF (NIHR-RP-2014-05-003). It was also supported by the NIHR Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre (BRC-1215-20005). DF is a NIHR senior investigator. RE is supported by a NIHR research professorship (NIHR300051), the NIHR Maudsley Biomedical Research Centre at South London Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, and King's College London. This paper presents independent research funded by the NIHR. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health and Social Care. FW is funded by a Wellcome Trust Clinical Doctoral Fellowship (102176/B/13/Z). We thank: the trial participants; the Feeling Safe Patient Advisory Group; the independent members of the Data Monitoring and Ethics Committee (Paul Bebbington, Paul French, Amy Hardy, Andrew Molodynski, and Victoria Vickerstaff) and the Trial Steering Committee (David Fowler, Belinda Lennox, and Anthony Morrison); Helen Startup for rating of therapy tapes; and the clinical teams in Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust, Northamptonshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, and Berkshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust.
Keywords: Adult, Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Delusions/therapy, Female, Friends/psychology, Humans, Male, Psychotic Disorders/therapy, State Medicine, United Kingdom

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 452860
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/452860
ISSN: 2215-0366
PURE UUID: 83e88108-671b-4e43-9b36-c9e3a13dd739

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 21 Dec 2021 17:58
Last modified: 16 Mar 2024 14:30

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Daniel Freeman
Author: Richard Emsley
Author: Rowan Diamond
Author: Nicola Collett
Author: Emily Bold
Author: Eleanor Chadwick
Author: Louise Isham
Author: Jessica C Bird
Author: Danielle Edwards
Author: David Kingdon
Author: Ray Fitzpatrick
Author: Thomas Kabir
Author: Felicity Waite
Corporate Author: Oxford Cognitive Approaches to Psychosis Trial Study Group

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×