Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://repository.monashhealth.org/monashhealthjspui/handle/1/51430
Title: | Cognitive remediation for schizophrenia: clinician perspectives on implementation barriers and facilitators. | Authors: | Altman R.A.E.;Reser M.;Tan E.J.;Rossell S.L. | Monash Health Department(s): | Psychology | Institution: | (Altman, Tan, Rossell) Centre for Mental Health and Brain Sciences, School of Health Sciences, Swinburne University of Technology, Australia (Altman) School of Health and Behavioural Sciences, University of the Sunshine Coast, Australia (Reser) Psychology and Services, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia (Tan) Memory Aging & Cognition Centre, National University Health System, Singapore (Tan) Department of Pharmacology, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore (Rossell) Department of Mental Health, St Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia |
Issue Date: | 28-Mar-2024 | Copyright year: | 2024 | Publisher: | American Psychological Association | Place of publication: | United States | Publication information: | Rehabilitation Psychology. 69(2) (pp 171-183), 2024. Date of Publication: 21 Mar 2024. | Journal: | Rehabilitation Psychology | Abstract: | Objectives: Neurocognitive deficits in schizophrenia have a major impact on functioning; however, they remain poorly targeted by available treatment offerings. Cognitive remediation (CR) is effective in improving neurocognition and functioning.Despite clinical guidelines for schizophrenia recommending CR, it is still not readily available in clinical services and sizeable attrition rates are reported in clinical trials. Method(s): To elucidate the barriers and facilitators of CR access and engagement,we conducted amixed methods qualitative-dominant study with 12 clinicians in Australia, in 2021, with 1 hr interviews and additional rating scales completed. Result(s): Thematic analysis highlighted four themes (cognitive symptoms, CR intervention, motivation and engagement in CR, and CR implementation), and 14 subthemes. Clinicians emphasized the broad impact of cognitive deficits and outlined pros and cons of different CR approaches. Several factors were suggested as impacting engagement, including motivation assessments/techniques, neurocognitive insight, illness, and demographic factors. Lack of routine implementation in Australia was unanimously espoused and partly explained by a need for cost-effectiveness analyses, remote and flexible delivery, and increasing service resource provision and staff training in CR. Conclusion(s): This study offers key insights into CR access, while recommending methods for optimizing CR implementation and dissemination to improve recovery outcomes of people diagnosed with schizophrenia.Copyright © 2024 American Psychological Association | DOI: | http://monash.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/rep0000552 | PubMed URL: | 38512182 [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=38512182] | URI: | https://repository.monashhealth.org/monashhealthjspui/handle/1/51430 | Type: | Article | Subjects: | cognitive defect schizophrenia |
Appears in Collections: | Articles |
Show full item record
Items in Monash Health Research Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.