Scholarlink

Background <p>Adolescents experiencing psychiatric emergencies often require intensive intervention to avoid hospital admission and support their transition into education, employment, or training (EET). Intensive Community Care Services (ICCS) offer a potential alternative to inpatient care. This pilot study aimed to assess the feasibility of conducting a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the effectiveness of ICCS compared to treatment as usual (TAU) in reducing time to start or return to EET.</p> Methods <p>A multi-centre, parallel-group, single-blinded randomised controlled trial (RCT) with an internal pilot phase was conducted across seven NHS Trusts in the UK. Adolescents aged 12–17 experiencing psychiatric emergencies were randomised to ICCS or treatment as usual (TAU). The primary outcome was time to start or return to EET within six months. Secondary outcomes included clinical symptoms, functioning, service satisfaction, service use, and health-related quality of life. Descriptive statistics and hazard ratios were calculated to explore group differences. Feasibility was assessed against pre-specified progression criteria.</p> Results <p>Thirty-six adolescents were randomised during the internal pilot phase. The recruitment rate did not meet the progression criteria, and continuation to a full evaluation trial was deemed unfeasible. During follow-up, 83.3% (<i>n</i> = 30) returned to EET, with a median time to EET of nine days (IQR: 1–49). Median time to EET was shorter in the ICCS group (6 days) compared to TAU (12 days), with a hazard ratio of 1.34 (95% CI: 0.63–2.86). ICCS was associated with improved service satisfaction, clinical symptoms, and functioning. The average cost per participant was higher in the TAU group (£15,155, SD 31,560) compared to ICCS (£7,063, SD 10,605), with minimal differences in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Fourteen safety events were reported across both groups.</p> Conclusions <p>A full evaluation trial was not feasible due to recruitment challenges, primarily arising from limited-service capacity to deliver two treatment pathways concurrently. Despite this, ICCS showed promising trends in clinical and functional outcomes and may offer a viable alternative to inpatient care. Further research is needed to explore the implementation and effectiveness of ICCS in routine practice.</p> Trial registration <p>ISRCTN, ISRCTN42999542. Registered 29/04/2020, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN42999542">https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN42999542</a>.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Intensive community care services for adolescents with acute psychiatric emergencies: trial feasibility findings from the pilot phase of a multi-centre randomised controlled trial

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年2月19日

查看全文
  • Dennis Ougrin,
  • Thilipan Thaventhiran,
  • Ben Hoi-Ching Wong,
  • Izabela Pilecka,
  • Sabine Landau,
  • Sarah Byford,
  • Petrina Chu,
  • Hassan Jafari,
  • Margaret Heslin,
  • Emma Tassie,
  • Paula Reavey,
  • Toby Zundel,
  • Mandy Wait,
  • Ruth Woolhouse,
  • Tauseef Mehdi,
  • Jovanka Tolmac,
  • Joe Clacey,
  • Leon Wehncke,
  • Veronika Beatrice Dobler,
  • Rhys Bevan-Jones

摘要

Background

Adolescents experiencing psychiatric emergencies often require intensive intervention to avoid hospital admission and support their transition into education, employment, or training (EET). Intensive Community Care Services (ICCS) offer a potential alternative to inpatient care. This pilot study aimed to assess the feasibility of conducting a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the effectiveness of ICCS compared to treatment as usual (TAU) in reducing time to start or return to EET.

Methods

A multi-centre, parallel-group, single-blinded randomised controlled trial (RCT) with an internal pilot phase was conducted across seven NHS Trusts in the UK. Adolescents aged 12–17 experiencing psychiatric emergencies were randomised to ICCS or treatment as usual (TAU). The primary outcome was time to start or return to EET within six months. Secondary outcomes included clinical symptoms, functioning, service satisfaction, service use, and health-related quality of life. Descriptive statistics and hazard ratios were calculated to explore group differences. Feasibility was assessed against pre-specified progression criteria.

Results

Thirty-six adolescents were randomised during the internal pilot phase. The recruitment rate did not meet the progression criteria, and continuation to a full evaluation trial was deemed unfeasible. During follow-up, 83.3% (n = 30) returned to EET, with a median time to EET of nine days (IQR: 1–49). Median time to EET was shorter in the ICCS group (6 days) compared to TAU (12 days), with a hazard ratio of 1.34 (95% CI: 0.63–2.86). ICCS was associated with improved service satisfaction, clinical symptoms, and functioning. The average cost per participant was higher in the TAU group (£15,155, SD 31,560) compared to ICCS (£7,063, SD 10,605), with minimal differences in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Fourteen safety events were reported across both groups.

Conclusions

A full evaluation trial was not feasible due to recruitment challenges, primarily arising from limited-service capacity to deliver two treatment pathways concurrently. Despite this, ICCS showed promising trends in clinical and functional outcomes and may offer a viable alternative to inpatient care. Further research is needed to explore the implementation and effectiveness of ICCS in routine practice.

Trial registration

ISRCTN, ISRCTN42999542. Registered 29/04/2020, https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN42999542.