Objective Longitudinal studies have begun to clarify the phenotypic characteristics of adolescents and young adults at clinical high risk for psychosis. This 8-site randomized trial examined whether a 6-month program of family psychoeducation was effective in reducing the severity of attenuated positive and negative psychotic symptoms and enhancing functioning among individuals at high risk. Method Adolescents and young adults (mean 17.4±4.1 years) with attenuated positive psychotic symptoms, brief and intermittent psychosis, or genetic risk with functional deterioration were randomly assigned to 18 sessions of family-focused therapy for individuals at clinical high risk (FFT-CHR) in 6 months or 3 sessions of family psychoeducation (enhanced care, or EC). FFT-CHR included psychoeducation about early signs of psychosis, stress management, communication training, and problem-solving skills training, whereas EC focused on symptom prevention. Independent evaluators assessed participants at baseline and 6 months on positive and negative symptoms and social-role functioning. Results Of 129 participants, 102 (79.1%) were followed at 6 months. Participants in FFT-CHR showed greater improvements in attenuated positive symptoms over 6 months than participants in EC (F[1,97]=5.49, P=.02). Negative symptoms improved independently of psychosocial treatments. Changes in psychosocial functioning depended on age: participants over 19 years showed more role improvement in FFT-CHR, whereas participants between 16 and 19 years showed more role improvement in EC. The results were independent of concurrent pharmacotherapy. Conclusion Interventions that focus on improving family relationships may have prophylactic efficacy in individuals at high risk for psychosis. Future studies should examine the specificity of effects of family intervention compared to individual therapy of the same duration and frequency.

No abstract

Objective This study investigated whether family focused therapy (FFT-CHR), an 18-session intervention that consisted of psychoeducation and training in communication and problem solving, brought about greater improvements in family communication than enhanced care (EC), a 3-session psychoeducational intervention, among individuals at clinical high risk for developing psychosis. Method This study was conducted within a randomized controlled trial across 8 sites. We examined 10-min problem-solving discussions at baseline and 6-month reassessment among 66 adolescents and young adults and their parents. Trained coders who were blind to treatment and time of assessment achieved high levels of interrater reliability when evaluating family discussions on categories of calm–constructive and critical– conflictual behavior. Results Individuals at high risk and their family members who participated in FFT-CHR demonstrated greater improvement from baseline to 6-month reassessment in constructive communication and decreases in conflictual behaviors during family interactions than those in EC. Participants in FFT-CHR showed greater increases from baseline to 6 months in active listening and calm communication and greater decreases in irritability and anger, complaints and criticism, and off-task comments compared to participants in EC. These changes occurred equally in high-risk participants and their family members. Conclusions A 6-month family skills training treatment can bring about significant improvement in family communication among individuals at high risk for psychosis and their parents. Future studies should examine the association between enhancements in family communication and reduced risk for the onset of psychosis among individuals at high risk.

We must develop innovative, easy-to-access and youth-focused online and social media experiences that encourage symptomatic youth to seek care.