Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Efficacy of bifocal diagnosis-independent group psychoeducation in severe psychiatric disorders: results from a randomized controlled trial

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Despite evidence for its efficacy, diagnosis-specific psychoeducation is not routinely applied. This exploratory randomized controlled trial analyses the efficacy of an easily implementable bifocal diagnosis-mixed group psychoeducation in the treatment of severe psychiatric disorders regarding readmission, compliance and clinical variables, for example global functioning. Inpatients of the Psychiatric Hospital of the University of Basel (N = 82) were randomly assigned to a diagnosis-mixed psychoeducational (PE) or a non-specific intervention control group. Relatives were invited to join corresponding family groups. Results at baseline, 3- and 12-month follow-ups are presented. Better compliance after 3 months and a lower suicide rate were significant in favour of PE. For most other outcome variables, no significant differences, however advantages, in PE were found. In summary, it can be concluded that diagnosis-mixed group psychoeducation is effective in the treatment of severe psychiatric disorders. The effects can be classified as induced by distinctive psychoeducational elements. Findings similar to those on psychosis-specific programmes justify clinical application and further investigation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Topics of the 10 sessions for patients are as follows (I = Information-session, T = Training- session, D = Discussion): (1) I: Mental functioning and disorders and the vulnerability-stress-model; (2) I: The brain and the neurobiological disease-model; (3) T: Coping with symptoms; (4) I: Treatment options and medication; (5) T: Handling of medication and coping with side-effects; (6) I: Social aspects of mental diseases; (7) T: Communication skills; (8) D: Coping with stigmatization; (9) I: Preparation of discharge and relapse prevention; (10) T: Detecting early symptoms and “My individual crisis strategy”. The program for relatives consists of 5 sessions including the topics of sessions 1, 2, 4, 6, 7 and 10 of the patient-version in a slightly modified form and additionally: Detection and management of challenging situations (T); Coping with feelings of shame and guilt (T); Stress reduction and problem solving strategies (T).

References

  1. The British Psychological Society and The Royal College of Psychiatry (2009) The NICE-Guidelines on core interventions in the treatment and management of schizophrenia in adults in primary and secondary care, national clinical guideline Number 82. Updated edition. National Institute for Clinical Excellence, London

  2. Bäuml J, Pitschel-Walz G (2008) Psychoedukation bei schizophrenen Erkrankungen. Schattauer, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  3. American Psychiatric Association (APA) (1998) Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with panic disorder. Am J Psychiatr 155(Suppl 5):1–34

    Google Scholar 

  4. American Psychiatric Association (APA) (2004) Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia, 2nd edn. APA, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  5. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychiatrie, Psychotherapie und Nervenheilkunde (DGPPN) (2000) Behandlungsleitlinie affektive Erkrankungen. Steinkopff, Darmstadt

    Book  Google Scholar 

  6. Colom F, Lam D (2005) Psychoeducation: improving outcomes in bipolar disorder. Eur Psychiatr 20:359–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Rabovsky K (2010) Psychoedukation und angehörigenzentrierte Interventionen bei depressiven Erkrankungen. Ther Umsch 67:593–596

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Pekkala E, Merinder L (2002) Psychoeducation for schizophrenia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev:CD002831

  9. Penn DL, Mueser KT (1996) Research update on the psychosocial treatment on schizophrenia. Am J Psychiatr 153:607–617

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Pitschel-Walz G, Leucht S, Bäuml J, Kissling W, Engel RR (2001) The effect of family intervention on relapse and rehospitalization in schizophrenia—a meta-analysis. Schizophr Bull 27:73–92

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Möller-Leimkühler AM, Jandl M (2011) Expressed and perceived emotion over time: does the patients` view matter for the caregivers` burden? Eur Arch Psychiatr Clin Neurosci 261:349–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Lincoln TM, Wilhelm K, Nestoriuc Y (2007) Effectiveness of psychoeducation for relapse, symptoms, knowledge, adherence and functioning in psychotic disorders: a meta-analysis. Schizophr Res 96:232–245

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Chan SW, Yip B, Tso S, Cheng BS, Tam W (2009) Evaluation of a psychoeducation program for Chinese clients with schizophrenia and their family caregivers. Patient Educ Couns 75:67–76

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Getachew H, Dimic S, Priebe S (2009) Is psychoeducation routinely provided in the UK? Survey of community mental health teams. The Psychiatrist 33:102–103

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lehman AF, Buchanan RW, Dickerson FB, Dixon LB, Goldberg R, Green-Paden L et al (2003) Evidence-based treatment for schizophrenia. Psychiatr Clin North Am 26:939–954

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Rummel-Kluge C, Pitschel-Walz G, Bäuml J, Kissling W (2006) Psychoeducation in schizophrenia—results of a survey of all psychiatric institutions in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Schizophr Bull 32:765–775

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Rummel-Kluge C, Pitschel-Walz G, Kissling W (2009) Psychoeducation in anxiety disorders: results of a survey of all psychiatric institutions in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Psychiatr Res 169:180–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Schomerus G, Matschinger H, Angermeyer MC (2009) The stigma of psychiatric treatment and help-seeking intentions for depression. Eur Arch Psychiatr Clin Neurosci 259:298–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Rabovsky K, Stoppe G (2006) Die Rolle der Psychoedukation in der stationären Behandlung psychisch Kranker—eine kritische Übersicht. Nervenarzt 77:538–548

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Rabovsky K, Stoppe G (2009) Diagnosenübergreifende und multimodale Psychoedukation. Manual zur Leitung von Patienten–und Angehörigengruppen. Urban & Fischer, München

    Google Scholar 

  21. Jensen M, Sadre Chirazi-Stark FM, Hoffmann G (2009) Diagnosenübergreifende Psychoedukation: Ein Manual für Patienten- und Angehörigengruppen. Psychiatrie-Verlag, Bonn

    Google Scholar 

  22. Dolder CR, Lacro JP, Leckband S, Jeste DV (2003) Interventions to improve antipsychotic medication adherence: review of recent literature. J Clin Psychopharmacol 23:389–399

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bäuml J, Pitschel-Walz G, Berger H, Gunia H, Heinz A, Juckel G (2010) Arbeitsbuch PsychoEdukation bei Schizophrenie (APES), 2nd edn. Schattauer, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  24. National Institute of Mental Health (1976) Clinical Global Impressions (CGI). In: Guy W (ed) ECDEU assessment manual for psychopharmacology, revised edition. Rockville, pp 218–222

  25. Endicott J, Spitzer RL, Fleiss JL, Cohen J (1976) The global assessment scale: a procedure for measuring overall severity of psychiatric disturbance. Arch Gen Psychiatr 33:766–771

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Angermeyer MC, Kilian R, Matschinger H (2000) WHOQOL-100 und WHOQOL-BREF: Handbuch für die deutschsprachige Version der WHO-Instrumente zur Erfassung von Lebensqualität. Hogrefe, Göttingen

    Google Scholar 

  27. Markova IS, Roberts KH, Gallagher C, Boos H, McKenna PJ, Berrios GE (2003) Assessment of insight in psychosis: a re-standardization of a new scale. Psychiatry Res 119:81–88

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Rudolf G (1991) Die therapeutische Arbeitsbeziehung. Springer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  29. Welch BL (1938) The significance of the differences between two means when the population variances are unequal. Biometrica 29:350–360

    Google Scholar 

  30. Harris AHS, Reeder R, Hyun JK (2009) Common statistical and research design problems in manuscripts submitted to high-impact psychiatry journals: what editors and reviewers want authors to know. J Psychiatr Res 43:1231–1234

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences, 2nd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale

    Google Scholar 

  32. Cohen J (1994) The earth is round (P < .05). Am Psychol 49:997–1003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. CONSORT Group (2006) CONSORT flow diagram. Available from: http://www.consort-statement.org/Downloads/flowchart.pdf. Accessed 20 February 2006

  34. Villeneuve K, Potvin S, Lesage A, Nicole L (2010) Meta-analysis of rates of drop-out from psychosocial treatment among persons with schizophrenia. Schizophr Res 121:266–270

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Fewtrell MS, Kennedy K, Singhal A, Martin RM, Ness A, Hadders-Algra M et al (2008) How much loss to follow-up is acceptable in long-term randomized trials and prospective studies? Arch Dis Child 93:458–461

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Pitschel-Walz G, Bäuml J, Bender W, Engel RR, Wagner M, Kissling W (2006) Psychoeducation and compliance in the treatment of schizophrenia: results of the Munich psychosis information project study. J Clin Psychiatr 67:443–452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kikkert MJ, Barbui C, Koeter MW, Davis AS, Leese M, Tansella M et al (2008) Assessment of medication adherence in patients with schizophrenia: the achilles heel of adherence research. J Nerv Ment Dis 196:274–281

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the patients and their family members who served as participants in this project and Prof. E. Letsch for conducting the randomization. The study was funded by the Gottfried und Julia Bangerter-Rhyner-Stiftung Basel, which we would like to thank for their financial support.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Psychiatric Hospital of the University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland

    K. Rabovsky, M. Trombini, D. Allemann & G. Stoppe

Authors
  1. K. Rabovsky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Trombini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. D. Allemann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. G. Stoppe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. Rabovsky.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rabovsky, K., Trombini, M., Allemann, D. et al. Efficacy of bifocal diagnosis-independent group psychoeducation in severe psychiatric disorders: results from a randomized controlled trial. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 262, 431–440 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00406-012-0291-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00406-012-0291-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation