Background DIALOG+ is an evidence-based, generic, cost-saving and easily deliverable psychosocial intervention, adaptable to clinicians’ personal manner of interaction with patients. It was implemented in mental health services in five low- and middle-income countries in South-Eastern Europe during a 12-month randomised-controlled trial (IMPULSE) to improve the effectiveness of out-patient treatment for people with psychotic disorders. Aims To investigate barriers and facilitators to the perceived sustainability of DIALOG+ that has been successfully implemented as a part of the IMPULSE project. Method Three months after the IMPULSE trial's end, perceived sustainability of the DIALOG+ intervention was assessed via a short survey of clinicians and patients who took part in the trial. Quantitative data collected from the survey were analysed using descriptive statistics; content analysis assessed qualitative survey data. The views and experiences of key informants (patients, clinicians and healthcare policy influencers) regarding the sustainability and scale-up of DIALOG+ were further explored through semi-structured interviews. These data were explored using framework analysis. Results Clinicians mostly appreciated the comprehensiveness of DIALOG+, and patients described DIALOG+ meetings as empowering and motivating. The barrier most commonly identified by key informants was availability of financial resources; the most important facilitators were the clinically relevant structure and comprehensiveness of the DIALOG+ intervention. Conclusions Participants showed a willingness to sustain the implementation of DIALOG+. It is important to maintain collaboration with healthcare policy influencers to improve implementation of DIALOG+ across different levels of healthcare systems and ensure availability of resources for implementing psychosocial interventions such as DIALOG+.

Introduction Resource-oriented interventions can be a low-cost option to improve care for patients with severe mental illnesses in low-resource settings. From 2018 to 2021 we conducted three randomized controlled trials testing resource-oriented interventions in Bosnia and Herzegovina (B&H), i.e. befriending through volunteers, multi-family groups, and improving patient-clinician meetings using the DIALOG+ intervention. All interventions were applied over 6 months and showed significant benefits for patients’ quality of life, social functioning, and symptom levels. In this study, we explore whether patient experiences point to common processes in these interventions. Methods In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 patients from each intervention, resulting in a total sample of 45 patients. Patients were purposively selected at the end of the interventions including patients with different levels of engagement and different outcomes. Interviews explored the experiences of patients and were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analysed using the thematic analysis framework proposed by Braun and Clark. Results Three broad themes captured the overall experiences of patients receiving resource-oriented interventions: An increased confidence and agency in the treatment process; A new and unexpected experience in treatment; Concerns about the sustainability of the interventions. Conclusions The findings suggest that the three interventions – although focusing on different relationships of the patients – lead to similar beneficial experiences. In addition to being novel in the context of the mental health care system in B&H, they empower patients to take a more active and confident role in treatment. Whilst strengthening patients’ agency in their treatment may be seen as a value in itself, it may also help to achieve significantly improved treatment outcomes. This shows promise for the implementation of these interventions in other low-resource countries with similar settings.

Introduction Schizophrenia (SCH) and bipolar affective disorder (BP) are complex disorders that overlapping both in their clinical symptoms and certain familiar characteristics. They share some common characteristcs but there are also key differences. The frequency of overlapping symptoms between these diseases could give us more information about the current validity of the diagnosis based on existing diagnostic criteria. Similarities within and between these two disorders in the future, can possibly redefine greater reliability of diagnosis. Objectives The aim of the study was to investigate the frequency of overlapping symptoms between BP and SCH. Methods The sample included 159 patients diagnosed with SCH and 61 with BP who were followed over a two year period. The research was conducted at the UCCS Psychiatric Clinic. Assessment of clinical symptoms and diagnosis were performed using a structured clinical interview (SCID I), a list of operationalized criteria (OPSCRIT), a scale for the assessment of positive and negative symptoms (PANSS), a scale for the assessment of manic symptoms (YMRS). Results The overall PANSS score was significantly higher in patients with SCH compared to patients with BP, but on the general psychopatology there are no significant differences betwen SCH and BP. Symptoms of mania are significantly more pronounced in patients with BP compared to those with SCH. Conclusions Our results of overlapping of individual symptoms between SCH and BP can speak infavor of the theory of disease continuum. And can also help us in understanding symptoms and guide us to develop optimal treatment strategies. Disclosure No significant relationships.

In the original publication of the article, the initial of Professor Stefan Priebe has been incorrectly published as ‘P’ instead of’S’. The correct author name is given in this erratum.

Aims Social isolation in people living with schizophrenia is associated with poor quality of life and increased symptom severity. Volunteer befriending interventions are a potential strategy for addressing social isolation, but evidence of their effectiveness is limited, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. We assessed the experiences of volunteer befriending and tested its effectiveness for improving the quality of life of patients with schizophrenia in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Methods Between March 2018 and July 2020, we conducted a parallel-group, randomised controlled trial in adults with schizophrenia and poor quality of life at an outpatient clinic in Sarajevo. Patients were randomised to either the intervention, in which they were matched with a volunteer befriender with whom they met fortnightly over the 6-month intervention period, or treatment as usual. The primary outcome was quality of life measured on the Manchester Short Assessment and secondary outcomes were psychiatric symptoms and objective social outcomes. Outcome measurement was conducted by blinded researchers at 6- and 12-months. Results In total, 65 patients were randomised into the intervention (n = 33) and control arms (n = 32) and 55 (85%) completed follow-up assessments at 6 months. Patients in the intervention showed a significantly more favourable quality of life at 6 months (primary outcome; mean difference: 0.7, 95% CI [0.3–1.1], p = 0.003) and 12 months (mean difference: 1.7, 95% CI [1.1–2.3], p < 0.001). They also had significantly lower symptom levels at both follow-ups, and a significantly more favourable objective social situation after 12 months. Participants reported largely positive experiences. Conclusion The exploratory trial conducted at one site found sustained improvements in quality of life and reductions in psychiatric symptoms. This suggests that volunteer befriending may be a feasible and effective treatment for patients with schizophrenia in resource-limited contexts, such as Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Background DIALOG+ is a resource-oriented and evidence-based intervention to improve quality of life and reduce mental distress. While it has been extensively studied in mental health care, there is little evidence for how to use it in primary care settings for patients with chronic physical conditions. Considering that DIALOG+ is used in existing routine patient-clinician meetings and is very low cost, it may have the potential to help large numbers of patients with chronic physical conditions, mental distress and poor quality of life who are treated in primary care. This is particularly relevant in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where resources for specialised services for such patients are scarce or non-existent. Methods An exploratory non-controlled trial will be conducted to primarily assess the feasibility and acceptability and, secondarily, outcomes of delivering DIALOG+ to patients with chronic physical conditions and poor quality of life in primary care settings in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Colombia and Uganda. Thirty patients in each country will receive DIALOG+ up to three times in monthly meetings over a 3-month period. Feasibility will be assessed by determining the extent to which the intervention is implemented as planned. Experiences will be captured in interviews and focus groups with care providers and participants to understand acceptability. Quality of life, symptoms of anxiety and depression, objective social situation and health status will be assessed at baseline and again after the three-session intervention. Discussion This study will inform our understanding of the extent to which DIALOG+ may be used in the routine care of patients with chronic physical conditions in different primary care settings. The findings of this exploratory trial can inform the design of future full randomised controlled trials of DIALOG+ in primary care settings in LMICs. Trial registration All studies were registered prospectively (on 02/12/2020 for Uganda and Bosnia and Herzegovina, and 01/12/2020 for Colombia) within the ISRCTN Registry. ISRCTN17003451 (Bosnia and Herzegovina), ISRCTN14018729 (Colombia) and ISRCTN50335796 (Uganda). Protocol version and date: v2.0; 28/07/2020 (Bosnia and Herzegovina), v0.3 02/08/2020 (Colombia) and v1.0, 05/11/2020 (Uganda).

BackgroundSevere mental illness (SMI) presents a major burden to societies worldwide. Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) often do not have sufficient financial resources and qualified staff to provide extensive specialised services for outpatients with SMI. Our research therefore aims to explore and test low-cost interventions that use existing resources in routine patient-clinician meetings, families and communities.MethodsIn Bosnia-Herzegovina, Colombia and Uganda, three psychosocial interventions will be tested, i.e. making patient-clinician meetings therapeutically effective through DIALOG+, family involvement in multi-family group meetings, and support for patients in befriending schemes with volunteers. All interventions will be provided to patients with SMI, delivered over a six-month period and evaluated with assessments at baseline and after six and 12 months. We will conduct nine trials including non-controlled trials, non-randomised controlled trials and randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Core outcome criteria will be used across all studies. However, details of study delivery and additional outcome criteria vary to accommodate local contexts, interests and priorities. The studies will be analysed separately, but with the option to compare and combine findings.DiscussionThe approach provides the opportunity to learn from commonalities and differences in the results and experiences across the three resource-oriented approaches and the three countries. If successfully implemented the studies can lead to more extensive research and are expected to inform health policies and clinical practice of community care for patients with SMI in the three participating countries and other LMICs.Trial registrationAll RCTs were registered prospectively and non-randomised trials retrospectively within the ISRCTN Registry.DIALOG+ in Uganda: ISRCTN25146122 (Date of Registration: 20/11/2018, prospective); DIALOG+ in Colombia: ISRCTN83333181 (Date of Registration: 20/11/2018, prospective); DIALOG+ in Bosnia-Herzegovina: ISRCTN13347129 (Date of Registration: 20/11/2018, prospective); Volunteer Support in Uganda: ISRCTN86689958 (Date of Registration: 04/03/2019, retrospective); Volunteer Support in Colombia: ISRCTN72241383 (Date of Registration: 04/03/2019, retrospective);Volunteer Support in Bosnia-Herzegovina: ISRCTN51290984 (Date of Registration: 20/11/2018, prospective); Family Involvement in Uganda: ISRCTN78948497 (Date of Registration: 04/03/2019, retrospective); Family Involvement in Colombia: ISRCTN11440755 (Date of Registration: 04/03/2019, retrospective); Family Involvement in Bosnia-Herzegovina: ISRCTN13347355 (Date of Registration: 20/11/2018, prospective).