Effects of a novel, brief psychological therapy (Managing Unusual Sensory Experiences) for hallucinations in first episode psychosis (MUSE FEP): Findings from an exploratory randomised controlled trial

Robert Dudley*, Guy Dodgson, Stephanie Common, Emmanuel Ogundimu, James Liley, Lucy O'Grady, Florence Watson, Christopher Gibbs, Bronia Arnott, Charles Fernyhough, Ben Alderson-Day, Charlotte Aynsworth

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Hallucinations are a common feature of psychosis, yet access to effective psychological treatment is limited. The Managing Unusual Sensory Experiences for First-Episode-Psychosis (MUSE-FEP) trial aimed to establish the feasibility and acceptability of a brief, hallucination-specific, digitally provided treatment, delivered by a non-specialist workforce for people with psychosis. MUSE uses psychoeducation about the causal mechanisms of hallucinations and tailored interventions to help a person understand and manage their experiences. We undertook a two-site, single-blind (rater) Randomised Controlled Trial and recruited 82 participants who were allocated 1:1 to MUSE and treatment as usual (TAU) (n = 40) or TAU alone (n = 42). Participants completed assessments before and after treatment (2 months), and at follow up (3–4 months). Information on recruitment rates, adherence, and completion of outcome assessments was collected. Analyses focussed on feasibility outcomes and initial estimates of intervention effects to inform a future trial. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry 16793301. Criteria for the feasibility of trial methodology and intervention delivery were met. The trial exceeded the recruitment target, had high retention rates (87.8%) at end of treatment, and at follow up (86.6%), with good acceptability of treatment. There were 3 serious adverse events in the therapy group, and 5 in the TAU group. Improvements were evident in both groups at the end of treatment and follow up, with a particular benefit in perceived recovery in the MUSE group. We showed it was feasible to increase access to psychological intervention but a definitive trial requires further changes to the trial design or treatment.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)289-296
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Psychiatric Research
Volume174
Early online date27 Apr 2024
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2024

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
This paper presents independent research funded by the NIHR under its Research for Patient Benefit (RfPB) Programme (Grant Reference Number: NIHR201078). MUSE was developed with support from the Wellcome Trust (grant number WT1087201). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR, or the Department of Health and Social Care. The study sponsor and funder have no role in study design; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of data; writing of the report; and the decision to submit the report for publication. RD and CA were also supported by NIHR ARC mental health research fellows awards.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2024

Keywords

  • Digital
  • Hallucinations: Treatment outcome research
  • Psychosis

Cite this