(1) Background: Family psychoeducation is a well-recognized intervention which aims to improve the outcomes of illness in patients affected by psychosis. It has benefits in treatment adherence and leads to a reduction in relapses, higher levels of patient insight, and lower levels of stress within the family and among caregivers. (2) Methods: Eight patients and their families were recruited and randomly assigned to a Falloon-based family psychoeducation (FPP) intervention, and nine patients and their families were randomized to a Gestalt-based family intervention (GT). We compared the outcomes of these two treatment groups at a baseline assessment (T0), at the end of the programs (T1), and 6 and 12 months after the end of the programs (T2 and T3). The assessments included examinations of cognition (The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and The Five Point Test (5 Point)), the psychopathology and severity of illness (The Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), and The Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI)), expressed emotion in families (Expressed Emotionality (Family Questionnaire-EE)), patient quality of life (The World Health Organization Quality of Life—BREF (WHOQOL-B)), social functioning (The Personal Social Performance (SPS)), aggression (Modified Overt Aggression Scale (MOAS)), and treatment adherence (The Brief Medication Adherence Report Scale (BMARS)). The primary aim was to test whether the FFP vs. GT program was more effective in improving treatment adherence over time. (3) Results: treatment adherence improved much more in the FFP group over time at any follow-up: +43.1% at T1, +24.0% at T2, and +41.6% at T3. Other characteristics, including psychopathology and the clinical stability of the subject, did not change over time. (4) Discussion: Family psychoeducation based on the Falloon program was effective at improving treatment adherence and contributed to avoiding relapses in the long term. Further studies on larger samples should be conducted to confirm this evidence, and similar psychoeducational programs should be routinely promoted in the clinical setting.

Background: The study aim was to review the evidence and effectiveness of psychological interventions applied during Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. Methods: A literature search was run from April 2020 to April 2021. The inclusion criteria were: (1) RCTs or observational studies; (2) professional health carers and patients who had contracted coronavirus during the pandemic; (3) adults and elderly people with a viral infection diagnosis; (4) suitable measures to assess intervention effectiveness on clinical status and psychological and behavioral aspects. An internal validity assessment was planned using robvis. Data were synthesized according to PICO criteria. Results: A total of 12 studies were selected. Studies measuring mental health outcomes demonstrated the greatest reduction in symptoms, with eight out of the twelve studies demonstrating a reduction in symptoms that reached statistical significance (p < 0.05) and four of the studies reaching a higher significance level of p < 0.01. The type of psychological intervention was predominantly cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). All studies except one was run online. Conclusion: Psychological interventions have a benefit on mental health outcomes, even if performed online. In particular, CBT seems to be the psychological intervention that is used more and also seems to have a larger effect size on the mitigation of mental health symptoms and increasing resilience.