Treatment outcomes of an integrated treatment model for patients with co-occurring opioid use and schizophrenia spectrum disorders

BackgroundIndividuals with schizophrenia spectrum disorders are at elevated risk for developing opioid use disorder and often experience higher substance use rates and morbidity. However, integrated treatment models for such patients remain rare.ObjectiveThis study addresses a gap in clinical knowledge by evaluating outcomes from a dual-diagnosis program tailored for patients with both disorders.MethodsThis retrospective case series analyzed electronic medical record data from when patients were enrolled in the program through March 1st, 2025 or program discharge.ResultsSeventeen patients attended at least one appointment. All patients had a diagnosis of opioid use disorder. Co-occurring psychotic disorders included schizoaffective disorder (13/17, 76%), schizophrenia (3/17, 18%), and unspecified psychotic disorder (1/17, 6%). On average, patients attended 58.8% of scheduled visits, and 47.1% remained actively enrolled as of 3/1/25. Medication adherence was high, with patients taking prescribed medications for opioid use disorder at 90.5% of visits and antipsychotics at 96.9% of visits. Compared to an equivalent pre-enrollment period, patients showed a significant reduction in emergency department visits (P=0.00051) and inpatient hospitalizations (P=0.00090).ConclusionFindings suggest that the integrated treatment model could offer benefits for patients with co-occurring opioid use disorder/schizophrenia spectrum disorders; patients had significantly reduced emergency department visit frequency and frequency/duration of hospitalizations. Patients demonstrated high adherence to medications for opioid use disorder and antipsychotics; appointment attendance remains an area for improvement. Further research with larger samples and longer follow-up is warranted.

Clinical practice guidelines and quality standards for early intervention in psychosis: an AGREE II appraisal and systematic review of service components

BackgroundEarly intervention in psychosis (EIP) is a key component of youth mental health care, yet recommended models of care for individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis (CHR-P) and first-episode psychosis (FEP) remain heterogeneous across jurisdictions. No previous study has combined a formal AGREE II appraisal with a structured synthesis of core service components for EIP.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review and AGREE II-based appraisal of international clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and quality standards (QSs). MEDLINE (via PubMed), the Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), Web of Science, guideline repositories, and grey literature sources were searched to March 2025 in accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidance. Eligible documents were CPGs or QSs published in English or Italian from 2005 onward containing recommendations on the organization, assessment, and treatment of CHR-P and/or FEP. Methodological quality was appraised with AGREE II (inter-rater agreement assessed using ICCs); recommendations were extracted, and core components required endorsement by at least one third of relevant documents with at least one strong or mandatory recommendation. Twenty-six documents (24 CPGs and 2 QSs) were included. Methodological quality was moderate overall, with substantial variability across AGREE II domains: scores were generally strongest for scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, and clarity of presentation, and more variable for Rigour of development, applicability, and editorial independence.ResultsWe identified 32 core recommendations. For CHR-P, the most consistent components were specialized services or dedicated pathways, comprehensive multidisciplinary assessment, cognitive-behavioural therapy, family interventions, and a cautious approach to antipsychotic use. For FEP, the most consistently endorsed components were specialized multidisciplinary teams, assertive and continuous follow-up, family work, psychoeducation, structured pharmacological monitoring, and supported education and employment.ConclusionThese findings provide a guideline-derived framework for youth EIP service delivery and model development, while highlighting the need for more methodologically robust and implementation-oriented guidance across settings.Systematic review registrationhttps://osf.io/cek7u, identifier cek7u.

Case Report: Multimodal clinical and neurophysiological effects of cranial electrotherapy stimulation in a patient with chronic stress and sleep disturbance

IntroductionCranial Electrotherapy Stimulation (CES) is a non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) technique used for anxiety and sleep disorders; however, case-level evidence linking clinical improvement with objective neurophysiological change remains limited. This case presents a multimodal examination of the therapeutic and neurophysiological effects of CES in a patient with sleep disturbances and chronic stress.MethodsA 51-year-old woman with chronic stress, anxiety, and persistent sleep disturbance following thyroid and parathyroid surgery, refractory to pharmacological treatment, underwent a 16-week CES intervention. Outcomes were assessed at baseline and follow-up using EQ-5D-5L, DASS-21, GAD-7, PSQI, and resting-state Electroencephalography (EEG).ResultsAnxiety, stress, and depressive symptoms improved to within normal ranges, alongside significant improvements in mental health-related quality of life. EEG demonstrated increased posterior alpha activity and improved frontal symmetry. Sleep quality showed modest improvement.ConclusionThis case suggests that CES may be a safe adjunctive intervention associated with symptomatic improvement and changes in neurophysiological patterns in stress-related conditions, supporting further controlled investigation.

Reduced serum cortisol, IGF-1, GLP-1, and T3 levels in medication-free children and adolescents with obsessive–compulsive disorder: a case–control study

IntroductionObsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) frequently emerges during childhood and adolescence and has been associated with alterations in multiple neurobiological systems. Neuroendocrine pathways involved in stress regulation, neurodevelopment, metabolic signaling, and thyroid function interact closely to influence brain circuits implicated in OCD. However, studies simultaneously examining several neuroendocrine parameters in pediatric OCD remain limited.MethodsThis case–control study included 52 medication-free children and adolescents with OCD and 42 healthy controls aged 8–17 years. Psychiatric diagnoses were established using the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-Age Children—Present and Lifetime Version (K-SADS-PL) according to DSM-5 criteria. Obsessive–compulsive symptom severity was assessed using the Children’s Yale–Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (CY-BOCS). Anxiety and depressive symptoms were evaluated using the Screen for Child Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders (SCARED) and the Children’s Depression Inventory (CDI), respectively. Serum levels of adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH), cortisol, growth hormone (GH), Insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), relaxin-3 (RLN-3), triiodothyronine (T3), and thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) were measured using ELISA. Group differences were examined using covariance-based models controlling for age, sex, BMI percentile, anxiety (SCARED), and depressive symptoms (CDI).ResultsInitial analyses showed that children and adolescents with OCD had significantly lower serum levels of cortisol, IGF-1, GLP-1, and T3 compared with healthy controls. These differences remained significant after controlling for age, sex, BMI percentile, and the SCARED and CDI total score, with adjusted analyses showing lower levels of cortisol (p = 0.003), IGF-1 (p = 0.013), GLP-1 (p = 0.017), and T3 (p = 0.015) in the OCD group. Correlation analyses did not reveal significant associations between biochemical parameters and OCD symptom severity after correction for multiple comparisons.DiscussionThese findings suggest that pediatric OCD may be associated with alterations in several neuroendocrine pathways rather than isolated changes within a single hormonal system. Further longitudinal studies are needed to better clarify the biological basis and clinical significance of these findings.