Alan S. Bellack

The 2009 Schizophrenia PORT Psychosocial Treatment Recommendations and Summary Statements

The Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team (PORT) psychosocial treatment recommendations provide a comprehensive summary of current evidence-based psychosocial treatment interventions for persons with schizophrenia. There have been 2 previous sets of psychosocial treatment recommendations (Lehman AF, Steinwachs DM. Translating research into practice: the Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team (PORT) treatment recommendations. Schizophr Bull. 1998;24:1-10 and Lehman AF, Kreyenbuhl J, Buchanan RW, et al. The Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team (PORT): updated treatment recommendations 2003. Schizophr Bull. 2004;30:193-217). This article reports the third set of PORT recommendations that includes updated reviews in 7 areas as well as adding 5 new areas of review. Members of the psychosocial Evidence Review Group conducted reviews of the literature in each intervention area and drafted the recommendation or summary statement with supporting discussion. A Psychosocial Advisory Committee was consulted in all aspects of the review, and an expert panel commented on draft recommendations and summary statements. Our review process produced 8 treatment recommendations in the following areas: assertive community treatment, supported employment, cognitive behavioral therapy, family-based services, token economy, skills training, psychosocial interventions for alcohol and substance use disorders, and psychosocial interventions for weight management. Reviews of treatments focused on medication adherence, cognitive remediation, psychosocial treatments for recent onset schizophrenia, and peer support and peer-delivered services indicated that none of these treatment areas yet have enough evidence to merit a treatment recommendation, though each is an emerging area of interest. This update of PORT psychosocial treatment recommendations underscores both the expansion of knowledge regarding psychosocial treatments for persons with schizophrenia at the same time as the limitations in their implementation in clinical practice settings.

The expert consensus guideline series

Abstract Over the past decade, many new epilepsy treatments have been approved in the United States, promising better quality of life for many with epilepsy. However, clinicians must now choose among a growing number of treatment options and possible combinations. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) form the basis for evidence-based decision making about best treatment options, but they rarely compare active therapies, making decisions difficult. When medical literature is lacking, expert opinion is helpful, but may contain potential biases. The expert consensus method is a new approach for statistically analyzing pooled opinion to minimize biases inherent in other systems of summarizing expert opinion. We used this method to analyze expert opinion on treatment of three epilepsy syndromes (idiopathic generalized epilepsy, symptomatic localization-related epilepsy, and symptomatic generalized epilepsy) and status epilepticus. For all three syndromes, the experts recommended the same general treatment strategy. As a first step, they recommend monotherapy. If this fails, a second monotherapy should be tried. Following this, the experts are split between additional trials of monotherapy and a combination of two therapies. If this fails, most agree the next step should be additional trials of two therapies, with less agreement as to the next best step after this. One exception to these recommendations is that the experts recommend an evaluation for epilepsy surgery after the third failed step for symptomatic localization-related epilepsies. The results of the expert survey were used to develop user-friendly treatment guidelines concerning overall treatment strategies and choice of specific medications for different syndromes and for status epilepticus.

Comorbidity of schizophrenia and substance abuse: implications for treatment.

The problem of substance abuse disorders in schizophrenia patients is reviewed, including the prevalence of co-morbid disorders, assessment, hypothesized mechanisms underlying abuse, and the clinical effects of abuse on the course of illness and cognitive functioning. The principles of treatment for dual-diagnosis schizophrenia patients are outlined, and the limitations of existing interventions are noted. Gaps in current knowledge about the impact of substance abuse on schizophrenia and its treatment are identified, and suggestions are made regarding promising avenues of research in this area.

A scientific agenda for the concept of recovery as it applies to schizophrenia

Recovery is now a widely discussed concept in the field of research, treatment, and public policy regarding schizophrenia. As it has increasingly become a focus in mainstream psychiatry, however, it has also become clear both that the concept is often used in multiple ways, and that it lacks a strong scientific basis. In this review, we argue that such a scientific basis is necessary for the concept of recovery to have a significant long-term impact on the way that schizophrenia is understood and treated. The discussion focuses on key issues necessary to establish this scientific agenda, including: 1) differences in definitions of recovery and their implications for studying recovery processes and outcomes; 2) key research questions; 3) the implications of data from outcome studies for understanding what is possible for people diagnosed with schizophrenia; 4) factors that facilitate recovery processes and outcomes, and methods for studying these issues; and 5) recovery-oriented treatment, including issues raised by peer support. Additional conceptual issues that have not received sufficient attention in the literature are then noted, including the role of evidence-based practices in recovery-oriented care, recovery-oriented care for elderly people with schizophrenia, trauma treatment and trauma-informed care, and the role of hospitals in recovery-oriented treatment. Consideration of these issues may help to organize approaches to the study of recovery, and in doing so, improve the impact of recovery-based initiatives.

Validity of the Distinction Between Generalized Social Phobia and Avoidant Personality Disorder

Disorders of pervasive social anxiety and inhibition are divided into 2 categories, generalized social phobia (GSP) and avoidant personality disorder (APD). We explored the discriminative validity of this categorization by examining the comorbidity of GSP and APD and by comparing these groups on anxiety level, social skills, dysfunctional cognitions, impairment in functioning, and presence of concurrent disorders. Results from 23 subjects showed high comorbidity of the 2 diagnoses: All subjects who met criteria for APD also met criteria for GSP. APD was associated with greater social anxiety, impairment in functioning, and comorbidity with other psychopathology, but no differences in social skills or performance on an impromptu speech. GSP and APD seem to represent quantitatively different variants of the same spectrum of psychopathology rather than qualitatively distinct disorders. We also investigated a proposed social phobia subtyping scheme.

Evaluation of social problem solving in schizophrenia.

We examined social problem solving in schizophrenia. Twenty-seven schizophrenic patients in an acute hospital, 19 patients with bipolar disease, and 17 demographically matched nonpatient controls were tested on an empirically developed problem-solving battery that assessed the ability to generate solutions to problems, the ability to evaluate the effectiveness of solutions, and the ability to implement solutions in a role-playing format. Schizophrenic Ss were impaired on all 3 problem-solving domains compared with the nonpatient controls, but bipolar Ss were equally impaired. Several alternative explanations for these findings were considered. The most compelling hypothesis is that the deficits resulted from different factors: cognitive impairment for schizophrenic Ss and acute illness for bipolar Ss. However, longitudinal studies are required to determine whether problem-solving deficits in schizophrenic patients persist during periods of remission. Implications for rehabilitation strategies are discussed.

Research and practice in social skills training

One: General Issues.- 1. Fundamentals of Interpersonal Behavior: A Social-Psychological Perspective.- 2. Sociopsychological Factors in Psychopathology.- 3. Behavioral Assessment of Social Skills.- Two: Treatment.- 4. Modification of Social Skill Deficits in Children.- 5. Modification of Heterosocial Skills Deficits.- 6. Modification of Skill Deficits in Psychiatric Patients.- 7. Assertion Training for Women.- 8. Communication Skills in Married Couples.- Three: Methodological Issues.- 9. Social Skills: Methodological Issues and Future Directions.

Prediction of social skill acquisition in schizophrenic and major affective disorder patients from memory and symptomatology

Memory and symptomatology were examined as predictors of social skill acquisition in psychiatric inpatients participating in a social skills training program. Poor memory was related to pretreatment social skill impairments and slower rates of skill improvement during the intervention for patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, but not affective disorder. Symptomatology was not consistently related to pretreatment social skill or changes in skill for either schizophrenic or affective disorder patients. The results suggest that cognitive deficits in schizophrenia are associated with impairments in social skill and that such deficits may limit the rate of skill acquisition and clinical response to social skills training interventions.

Social skills training for chronic psychiatric patients: Rationale, research findings, and future directions

Abstract In 1969 Gordon Paul stated that “the ‘hard core’ refractory group of chronic mental patients is clearly one of the most difficult problems facing the mental health field today.” 1 Although some progress has been achieved in this area since then, 2–7 this same hard-core group of patients (most of whom bear schizophrenic diagnoses) remains a persistent challenge to mental health practitioners. A variety of pharmacologic, socioenvironmental, and behavioral approaches (primarily the token economy) have been applied to this group of chronic psychiatric patients. We will very briefly examine the major contributions and limitations of each approach.

Recurrent problems in the behavioral assessment of social skill

Abstract Behavioral strategies for assessing social skill have been subjected to extensive analysis and criticism in the past few years. Many problems with earlier strategies have been corrected, yet the literature continues to be marked by a number of serious errors and invalid procedures. The purpose of this paper is to identify some of these recurrent difficulties, and recommend alternatives where possible. The discussion covers three general topics: the measures employed, the assessment format and conceptual issues which bear on assessment. Specific issues addressed include the respective value of molecular and molar ratings, the extent to which subjects actually engage in role playing, the utility of single prompt role-play tests, the selection and form of role-play scenarios and the role of skill deficits in interpersonal dysfunction. Some of the major assumptions and persistent dilemmas in the existing literature are examined in the light of questionable and often invalid assessment procedures.