Search

Objective: Conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of individual humanistic-experiential therapies (HEPs) for depression., Method: Database searches (Scopus, Medline, and PsycINFO) identified RCTs comparing any HEP intervention with a treatment-as-usual (TAU) control or active alternative intervention for the treatment of depression. Included studies were assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 tool and narratively synthesized. Post-treatment and follow-up effect sizes were aggregated using random-effects meta-analysis and moderators of treatment effect were explored (PROSPERO: CRD42021240485)., Results: Seventeen RCTs, synthesized across four meta-analyzes, indicated HEP depression outcomes were significantly better than TAU controls at post-treatment ( g  = 0.41, 95% CI [0.18, 0.65], n  = 735), but not significantly different at follow-up ( g  = 0.14, 95% CI [-0.30, 0.58], n  = 631). HEP depression outcomes were comparable to active treatments at post-treatment ( g  = -0.09, 95% CI [-0.26, 0.08], n  = 2131), but significantly favored non-HEP alternative interventions at follow-up ( g  = -0.21, 95% CI [-0.35, -0.07], n  = 1196)., Conclusion: Relative to usual care, HEPs are effective in the short-term and comparable to non-HEP alternative interventions at post-treatment, but not at follow-up. However, imprecision, inconsistency, and risk of bias concerns were identified as limitations of the evidence included. Future large-scale trials of HEPs with equipoise between comparator conditions are required.

Currently, no reports exist on the phenomenon of early response in humanistic-experiential therapies. This study investigated the prognostic value of early response on posttreatment outcomes in person-centered experiential therapy (PCET) for depression within the English Improving Access to Psychological Therapies program. The design of the study was a retrospective observational cohort study. Routine clinical data were drawn from N = 3,321 patients with depression symptoms. The primary outcome was reliable and clinically significant improvement (RCSI) on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) self-report depression measure at the end of treatment. Early response was operationalized as reliable improvement, defined as a PHQ-9 change score ≥ 6 from baseline to Session 4. Early response was examined as a predictor of RCSI using logistic regression controlling for baseline depression severity. In sensitivity analyses, therapist effects were controlled using multilevel modeling. A total of 38.7% of patients met the criterion for early response. Patients who experienced an early response to treatment were six times more likely to recover at the end of treatment compared to patients who did not have an early response. The early response effect was still evident after accounting for individual variability between therapists. However, a quarter of patients displayed a pattern of eventual response, reaching recovery at end of treatment despite not experiencing an initial improvement early in therapy. Early response to PCET is a reliable predictor of treatment outcome. Different response patterns evidenced in this study indicate that identifying subgroups of patients associated with early and eventual response could support clinical decision-making. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Importance: Depression is a major cause of disability worldwide. Although empirically supported treatments are available, there is scarce evidence on how to effectively personalize psychological treatment selection., Objective: To compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of 2 treatment selection strategies: stepped care and stratified care., Design, Setting, and Participants: This multisite, cluster randomized clinical trial recruited participants from the English National Health Service from July 5, 2018, to February 1, 2019. Thirty clinicians working across 4 psychological therapy services were randomly assigned to provide stratified (n = 15) or stepped (n = 15) care. In stepped care, patients sequentially access low-intensity guided self-help followed by high-intensity psychotherapy. In stratified care, patients are matched with either low- or high-intensity treatments at initial assessment. Data were analyzed from May 18, 2020, to October 13, 2021, using intention-to-treat principles., Interventions: All clinicians used the same interview schedule to conduct initial assessments with patients seeking psychological treatment for common mental disorders, but those in the stratified care group received a personalized treatment recommendation for each patient generated by a machine learning algorithm. Eligible patients received either stratified or stepped care (ie, treatment as usual)., Main Outcomes and Measures: The preregistered outcome was posttreatment reliable and clinically significant improvement (RCSI) of depression symptoms (measured using the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire). The RCSI outcome was compared between groups using logistic regression adjusted for baseline severity. Cost-effectiveness analyses compared incremental costs and health outcomes of the 2 treatment pathways., Results: A total of 951 patients were included (618 women among 950 with data available [65.1%]; mean [SD] age, 38.27 [14.53] years). The proportion of cases of RCSI was significantly higher in the stratified care arm compared with the stepped care arm (264 of 505 [52.3%] vs 134 of 297 [45.1%]; odds ratio, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.04-1.87]; P = .03). Stratified care was associated with a higher mean additional cost per patient (£104.5 [95% CI, £67.5-£141.6] [$139.83 (95% CI, $90.32-$189.48)]; P < .001) because more patients accessed high-intensity treatments (332 of 583 [56.9%] vs 107 of 368 [29.1%]; χ2 = 70.51; P < .001), but this additional cost resulted in an approximately 7% increase in the probability of RCSI., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cluster randomized clinical trial of adults with common mental disorders, stratified care was efficacious and cost-effective for the treatment of depression symptoms compared with stepped care. Stratified care can improve depression treatment outcomes at a modest additional cost., Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN11106183.

Background: The UK Government's implementation in 2008 of the Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) initiative in England has hugely increased the availability of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for the treatment of depression and anxiety in primary care. Counselling for depression-a form of person-centred experiential therapy (PCET)-has since been included as an IAPT-approved therapy, but there is no evidence of its efficacy from randomised controlled trials (RCTs), as required for recommendations by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Therefore, we aimed to examine whether PCET is cost effective and non-inferior to CBT in the treatment of moderate and severe depression within the IAPT service., Methods: This pragmatic, randomised, non-inferiority trial was done in the Sheffield IAPT service in England and recruited participants aged 18 years or older with moderate or severe depression on the Clinical Interview Schedule-Revised. We excluded participants presenting with an organic condition, a previous diagnosis of personality disorder, bipolar disorder, or schizophrenia, drug or alcohol dependency, an elevated clinical risk of suicide, or a long-term physical condition. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1), independently of the research team, and stratified by site with permuted block sizes of two, four, or six, to receive either PCET or CBT by use of a remote, web-based system that revealed therapy after patient details were entered. Those assessing outcomes were masked to treatment allocation. Participants were seen by appropriately trained PCET counsellors and CBT therapists in accordance with the IAPT service delivery model. Depression severity and symptomatology measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) at 6 months post-randomisation was the primary outcome, with the PHQ-9 score at 12 months post-randomisation being a key secondary outcome. These outcomes were analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population, which comprised all randomly assigned patients with complete data, and the per-protocol population, which comprised all participants who did not switch from their randomised treatment and received between four and 20 sessions. Safety was analysed in all randomly assigned patients. The non-inferiority margin was set a priori at 2 PHQ-9 points. Patient safety was monitored throughout the course of therapy, adhering to service risk procedures for monitoring serious adverse events. This trial is registered at the ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN06461651, and is complete., Findings: From Nov 11, 2014, to Aug 3, 2018, 9898 patients were referred to step three treatments in the Sheffield IAPT service for common mental health problems, of whom 761 (7·7%) were referred to the trial. Of these, we recruited and randomly assigned 510 participants to receive either PCET (n=254) or CBT (n=256). In the PCET group, 138 (54%) participants were female and 116 (46%) were male, and 225 (89%) were White, 16 (6%) were non-White, and 13 (5%) had missing ethnicity data. In the CBT group, 155 (61%) participants were female and 101 (39%) were male, and 226 (88%) were White, 17 (7%) were non-White, and 13 (5%) had missing ethnicity data. The 6-month modified intention-to-treat analysis comprised 401 (79%) of the enrolled participants (201 in the PCET group; 200 in the CBT group) and the 12-month modified intention-to-treat analysis comprised 319 participants (167 in the PCET group; 152 in the CBT group). The 6-month per-protocol analysis comprised 298 participants (154 in the PCET group; 144 in the CBT group). At 6 months post-randomisation, PCET was non-inferior to CBT in the intention-to-treat population (mean PHQ-9 score 12·74 [SD 6·54] in the PCET group and 13·25 [6·35] in the CBT group; adjusted mean difference -0·35 [95% CI -1·53 to 0·84]) and in the per-protocol population (12·73 [SD 6·57] in the PCET group and 12·71 [6·33] in the CBT group; 0·27 [95% CI -1·08 to 1·62]). At 12 months post-randomisation, there was a significant adjusted between-group difference in mean PHQ-9 score in favour of CBT (1·73 [95% CI 0·26-3·19]), with a 95% CI exceeding the 2-point non-inferiority margin. There were two deaths, one death by suicide in the PCET group and one due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the CBT group. Both were assessed by the responsible clinician to be unrelated to the trial. In terms of using emergency departments for depression-related events, four people (three in the PCET group; one in the CBT group) made more than a single use and six people (three in the PCET group; three in the CBT group) made a single use. One patient in the PCET group had inpatient treatment for a depression-related event., Interpretation: This trial is the first to examine the two most frequently administered psychological therapies in the IAPT service. The finding of non-inferiority of PCET to CBT at 6 months supports the results from large, routine, non-randomised datasets from the IAPT programme. Given the high demand for psychological therapies and the need for patient choice, our findings suggest the need for continued investment in the training and delivery of PCET for improving short-term outcomes, but suggest that PCET might be inferior to CBT at 12 months., Funding: British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy Research Foundation., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MBa is on the editorial board of the journal published by the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy (BACP), for which he is entitled to an honorarium, has previously been an unpaid member of the BACP Research Committee and Scientific Committee and received travel expenses, and was the principal investigator (1995–97) for grants from the Mental Health Foundation to fund the development of the CORE-OM. DS has received funding from the BACP to analyse routine IAPT datasets. GEH is the director of a clinical psychology unit that hosts training programmes for IAPT low-intensity and high-intensity practitioners. PB has been a consultant for the BACP (but not in the past 5 years) and currently sits on committees for NICE and IAPT. MK has previously been an unpaid member of the BACP Scientific Board. RE writes about, practises, and delivers supervision and training on PCET and emotion-focused therapy, of which he is one of the founders and receives royalties on published texts. LG is a past chair of the BACP and hosts a national training programme in PCET. SK is an IAPT programme director delivering training in CBT to IAPT trainees. TW is a clinical director in the Sheffield Health and Social Care NHS Foundation Trust, head of the Sheffield IAPT service, has previously been a NICE panel member for online IAPT programmes, and contributed to the national manual for IAPT. GW receives royalties on CBT books and served on a NICE committee relating to eating disorders. SP is in receipt of funding from NICE for the development of clinical guidelines. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Depression has serious personal, family and economic consequences. It is estimated that it will cost £12.15 billion to the economy each year in England by 2026. Improving access to psychological therapies (IAPT) is the National Health Service talking therapies service in England for adults experiencing anxiety or depression. Over 1 million people are referred to IAPT every year, over half experiencing depression. Where symptoms of depression are mild to moderate, people are typically offered cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) self-help (CBT-SH) supported by a psychological well-being practitioner. The problem is that over half of people who complete treatment for depression in IAPT remain depressed despite receiving National Institute of Health and Care Excellent recommended treatment. Furthermore, less than half of IAPT service users complete treatment. This study seeks to investigate the effectiveness of an alternative to CBT-SH. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) differs from CBT in focus, approach and practice, and may be more effective with a higher number of treatment completions., Methods/design: This is a definitive randomised controlled trial comparing supported MBCT self-help (MBCT-SH) with CBT-SH for adults experiencing mild to moderate depression being treated in IAPT services. We will recruit 410 participants experiencing mild to moderate depression from IAPT services and randomise these to receive either an MBCT-based self-help workbook or a CBT-based self-help workbook. Participants will be asked to complete their workbook within 16 weeks, with six support sessions with a psychological well-being practitioner. The primary outcome is depression symptom severity on treatment completion. Secondary outcomes are treatment completion rates and measures of generalized anxiety, well-being, functioning and mindfulness. An exploratory non-inferiority analysis will be conducted in the event the primary hypothesis is not supported. A semi-structured interview with participants will guide understanding of change processes., Discussion: If the findings from this randomised controlled trial demonstrate that MBCT-SH is more effective than CBT-SH for adults experiencing depression, this will provide evidence for policy makers and lead to changes to clinical practice in IAPT services, leading to greater choice of self-help treatment options and better outcomes for service users. If the exploratory non-inferiority analysis is conducted and this indicates non-inferiority of MBCT-SH in comparison to CBT-SH this will also be of interest to policy makers when seeking to increase service user choice of self-help treatment options for depression., Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trial registration number: ISRCTN 13495752. Registered on 31 August 2017 (www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN13495752).

Background: Occupational burnout is common in mental health professionals, but its impact on patient outcomes is as yet uncertain. This study aimed to investigate associations between therapist-level burnout and patient-level treatment outcomes after psychological therapy., Methods: We used multilevel modeling using depression (PHQ-9) and anxiety (GAD-7) outcomes data from 2,223 patients nested within 49 therapists. Therapists completed a survey including the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (OLBI) and a job satisfaction scale (JDSS)., Results: After controlling for case-mix, around 5% of variability in treatment outcomes was explained by therapist effects (TE). Higher therapist OLBI-disengagement and lower JDSS scores were significantly associated with poorer treatment outcomes, explaining between 31 and 39% of the TE estimate. Higher OLBI scores were also correlated with lower job satisfaction ratings., Conclusions: Therapist burnout has a negative impact on treatment outcomes and could be the target of future preventive and remedial action., (© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: NICE guidelines state cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is a front-line psychological treatment for people presenting with depression in primary care. Counselling for Depression (CfD), a form of Person-Centred Experiential therapy, is also offered within Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) services for moderate depression but its effectiveness for severe depression has not been investigated. A full-scale randomised controlled trial to determine the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of CfD is required., Methods: PRaCTICED is a two-arm, parallel group, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial comparing CfD against CBT. It is embedded within the local IAPT service using a stepped care service delivery model where CBT and CfD are routinely offered at step 3. Trial inclusion criteria comprise patients aged 18 years or over, wishing to work on their depression, judged to require a step 3 intervention, and meeting an ICD-10 diagnosis of moderate or severe depression. Patients are randomised using a centralised, web-based system to CfD or CBT with each treatment being delivered up to a maximum 20 sessions. Both interventions are manualised with treatment fidelity tested via supervision and random sampling of sessions using adherence/competency scales. The primary outcome measure is the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 collected at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Secondary outcome measures tap depression, generic psychological distress, anxiety, functioning and quality of life. Cost-effectiveness is determined by a patient service receipt questionnaire. Exit interviews are conducted with patients by research assessors blind to treatment allocation. The trial requires 500 patients (250 per arm) to test the non-inferiority hypothesis of -2 PHQ-9 points at the one-sided, 2.5% significance level with 90% power, assuming no underlying difference and a standard deviation of 6.9. The primary analysis will be undertaken on all patients randomised (intent to treat) alongside per-protocol and complier-average causal effect analyses as recommended by the extension to the CONSORT statement for non-inferiority trials., Discussion: This large-scale trial utilises routinely collected outcome data as well as specific trial data to provide evidence of the comparative efficacy and cost-effectiveness of Counselling for Depression compared with Cognitive Behaviour Therapy as delivered within the UK government's Improving Access to Psychological Therapies initiative., Trial Registration: Controlled Trials ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN06461651 . Registered on 14 September 2014.

Background: Computerised cognitive behaviour therapy (cCBT) is an efficient form of therapy potentially improving access to psychological care. Indirect evidence suggests that the uptake and effectiveness of cCBT can be increased if facilitated by telephone, but this is not routinely offered in the NHS., Objectives: To compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of telephone-facilitated free-to-use cCBT [e.g. MoodGYM (National Institute for Mental Health Research, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia)] with minimally supported cCBT., Design: This study was a multisite, pragmatic, open, two-arm, parallel-group randomised controlled trial with a concurrent economic evaluation., Setting: Participants were recruited from GP practices in Bristol, Manchester, Sheffield, Hull and the north-east of England., Participants: Potential participants were eligible to participate in the trial if they were adults with depression scoring ≥ 10 on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9)., Interventions: Participants were randomised using a computer-generated random number sequence to receive minimally supported cCBT or telephone-facilitated cCBT. Participants continued with usual general practitioner care., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was self-reported symptoms of depression, as assessed by the PHQ-9 at 4 months post randomisation., Secondary Outcomes: Secondary outcomes were depression at 12 months and anxiety, somatoform complaints, health utility (as assessed by the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions questionnaire) and resource use at 4 and 12 months., Results: Clinical effectiveness: 182 participants were randomised to minimally supported cCBT and 187 participants to telephone-facilitated cCBT. There was a difference in the severity of depression at 4 and 12 months, with lower levels in the telephone-facilitated group. The odds of no longer being depressed (defined as a PHQ-9 score of < 10) at 4 months were twice as high in the telephone-facilitated cCBT group [odds ratio (OR) 2.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.23 to 3.42]. The benefit of telephone-facilitated cCBT was no longer significant at 12 months (OR 1.63, 95% CI 0.98 to 2.71). At 4 months the between-group difference in PHQ-9 scores was 1.9 (95% CI 0.5 to 3.3). At 12 months the results still favoured telephone-facilitated cCBT but were no longer statistically significant, with a difference in PHQ-9 score of 0.9 (95% CI -0.5 to 2.3). When considering the whole follow-up period, telephone-facilitated cCBT was asssociated with significantly lower PHQ-9 scores than minimally supported cCBT (mean difference -1.41, 95% CI -2.63 to -0.17; p  = 0.025). There was a significant improvement in anxiety scores over the trial period (between-group difference 1.1, 95% CI 0.1 to 2.3; p  = 0.037). In the case of somatic complaints (assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-15), there was a borderline statistically significant difference over the trial period (between-group difference 1.1, 95% CI 0.0 to 1.8; p  = 0.051). There were gains in quality-adjusted life-years at reduced cost when telephone facilitation was added to MoodGYM. However, the results were subject to uncertainty., Conclusions: The results showed short-term benefits from the addition of telephone facilitation to cCBT. The effect was small to moderate and comparable with that of other primary care psychological interventions. Telephone facilitation should be considered when offering cCBT for depression., Limitations: Participants' depression was assessed with the PHQ-9, cCBT use was quite low and there was a slightly greater than anticipated loss to follow-up., Future Research Recommendations: Improve the acceptability of cCBT and its capacity to address coexisting disorders. Large-scale pragmatic trials of cCBT with bibliotherapy and telephone-based interventions are required., Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN55310481., Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment ; Vol. 20, No. 89. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Background: The prevalence of depression in people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS) is high; however, symptoms common to both conditions makes measurement difficult. There is no high quality overview of validation studies to guide the choice of depression inventory for this population., Methods: A systematic review of studies validating the use of generic depression inventories in people with MS was conducted using MEDLINE and PsycINFO. Studies validating the use of depression inventories in PwMS and published in English were included; validation studies of tests for cognitive function and general mental health were excluded. Eligible studies were then quality assessed using the COSMIN checklist and findings synthesised narratively by instrument and validity domain., Results: Twenty-one studies (N = 5,991 PwMS) evaluating 12 instruments were included in the review. Risk of bias varied greatly between instrument and validity domain., Conclusions: The review of validation studies was constrained by poor quality reporting and outcome reporting bias. Well-conducted evaluations of some instruments are unavailable for some validity domains. This systematic review provides an evidence base for trade-offs in the selection of an instrument for assessing self-reported symptoms of depression in research or clinical practice involving people with MS. We make detailed and specific recommendations for where further research is needed., Trial Registration: PROSPERO CRD42014010597.

Study Question: How effective is supported computerised cognitive behaviour therapy (cCBT) as an adjunct to usual primary care for adults with depression?, Methods: This was a pragmatic, multicentre, three arm, parallel randomised controlled trial with simple randomisation. Treatment allocation was not blinded. Participants were adults with symptoms of depression (score ≥ 10 on nine item patient health questionnaire, PHQ-9) who were randomised to receive a commercially produced cCBT programme ("Beating the Blues") or a free to use cCBT programme (MoodGYM) in addition to usual GP care. Participants were supported and encouraged to complete the programme via weekly telephone calls. Control participants were offered usual GP care, with no constraints on the range of treatments that could be accessed. The primary outcome was severity of depression assessed with the PHQ-9 at four months. Secondary outcomes included health related quality of life (measured by SF-36) and psychological wellbeing (measured by CORE-OM) at four, 12, and 24 months and depression at 12 and 24 months., Study Answer and Limitations: Participants offered commercial or free to use cCBT experienced no additional improvement in depression compared with usual GP care at four months (odds ratio 1.19 (95% confidence interval 0.75 to 1.88) for Beating the Blues v usual GP care; 0.98 (0.62 to 1.56) for MoodGYM v usual GP care). There was no evidence of an overall difference between either programme compared with usual GP care (0.99 (0.57 to 1.70) and 0.68 (0.42 to 1.10), respectively) at any time point. Commercially provided cCBT conferred no additional benefit over free to use cCBT or usual GP care at any follow-up point. Uptake and use of cCBT was low, despite regular telephone support. Nearly a quarter of participants (24%) had dropped out by four months. The study did not have enough power to detect small differences so these cannot be ruled out. Findings cannot be generalised to cCBT offered with a much higher level of guidance and support., What This Study Adds: Supported cCBT does not substantially improve depression outcomes compared with usual GP care alone. In this study, neither a commercially available nor free to use computerised CBT intervention was superior to usual GP care., Funding, Competing Interests, Data Sharing: Commissioned and funded by the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme (project No 06/43/05). The authors have no competing interests. Requests for patient level data will be considered by the REEACT trial management groupTrial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN91947481., (© Gilbody et al 2015.)

Background: Stepped care service delivery models involve treatments that become increasingly intense through successive steps, with patients re-assigned via pre-defined decision criteria. This article reviews the clinical effectiveness of stepped care systems for depression in working age adults., Methods: Systematic literature review of quantitative clinical outcome evidence comprising 14 controlled and uncontrolled studies meeting specified criteria. Principal outcomes were (a) recovery rates, defined as patients no longer meeting clinical cut-off criteria for the specific outcome measure and (b) treatment response rates, defined as a 50% decrease in outcome measure score., Results: Stepped care systems had recovery rates ranging predominantly between 40% and 60% and response rates approximating 60%. Studies comparing stepped care with usual/enhanced usual care tended to find significant differences favouring stepped care. The median recovery odds ratio was 1.31 (interquartile intervals of 1.05 and 1.66; k=7 studies). The median comparative Cohen's d effect size estimate was 0.41 (interquartile intervals 0.25 and 0.45; k=5 studies)., Limitations: The inclusion of uncontrolled studies could be seen as reducing the overall quality of evidence and a meta-analysis was not included due to limitations with the available data., Conclusions: Evidence suggested that stepped care interventions for depression are at least as effective as usual care. However, the clinical and organisational superiority of stepped care is yet to be scientifically verified. Differential benefits of stepped care may ultimately depend on service quality. Further research investigating and comparing the specific components and configurations of stepped care interventions are indicated., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The aim of this research was (a) to determine the extent of therapist effects in Psychological Wellbeing Practitioners (PWPs) delivering guided self-help in IAPT services and (b) to identify factors that defined effective PWP clinical practice. Using patient (N = 1122) anxiety and depression outcomes (PHQ-9 and GAD-7), the effectiveness of N = 21 PWPs across 6 service sites was examined using multi-level modelling. PWPs and their clinical supervisors were also interviewed and completed measures of ego strength, intuition and resilience. Therapist effects accounted for around 9 per cent of the variance in patient outcomes. One PWP had significantly better than average outcomes on both PHQ-9 and GAD-7 while 3 PWPs were significantly below average on the PHQ-9 and 2 were below average on the GAD-7. Computed PWP ranks identified quartile clusters of the most (N = 5) and least (N = 5) effective PWPs. More effective PWPs generated higher rates of reliable and clinically significant change and displayed greater resilience, organisational abilities, knowledge and confidence. Study weaknesses are identified and methodological considerations for future studies examining therapist effects in low intensity cognitive behaviour therapy are provided., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Collaborative care is an effective treatment for the management of depression but evidence on its cost-effectiveness in the UK is lacking., Aims: To assess the cost-effectiveness of collaborative care in a UK primary care setting., Methods: An economic evaluation alongside a multi-centre cluster randomised controlled trial comparing collaborative care with usual primary care for adults with depression (n = 581). Costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated over a 12-month follow-up, from the perspective of the UK National Health Service and Personal Social Services (i.e. Third Party Payer). Sensitivity analyses are reported, and uncertainty is presented using the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC) and the cost-effectiveness plane., Results: The collaborative care intervention had a mean cost of £272.50 per participant. Health and social care service use, excluding collaborative care, indicated a similar profile of resource use between collaborative care and usual care participants. Collaborative care offered a mean incremental gain of 0.02 (95% CI: -0.02, 0.06) quality-adjusted life-years over 12 months, at a mean incremental cost of £270.72 (95% CI: -202.98, 886.04), and resulted in an estimated mean cost per QALY of £14,248. Where costs associated with informal care are considered in sensitivity analyses collaborative care is expected to be less costly and more effective, thereby dominating treatment as usual., Conclusion: Collaborative care offers health gains at a relatively low cost, and is cost-effective compared with usual care against a decision-maker willingness to pay threshold of £20,000 per QALY gained. Results here support the commissioning of collaborative care in a UK primary care setting.

Background: Effective psychological therapies have been recommended for common mental health problems, such as depression and anxiety, but provision has been poor. Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) may provide a cost-effective solution to this problem., Aims: To determine the cost-effectiveness of IAPT at the Doncaster demonstration site (2007-2009)., Method: An economic evaluation comparing costs and health outcomes for patients at the IAPT demonstration site with those for comparator sites, including a separate assessment of lost productivity. Sensitivity analyses were undertaken., Results: The IAPT site had higher service costs and was associated with small additional gains in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) compared with its comparator sites, resulting in a cost per QALY gained of £29 500 using the Short Form (SF-6D). Sensitivity analysis using predicted EQ-5D scores lowered this to £16 857. Costs per reliable and clinically significant (RCS) improvement were £9440 per participant., Conclusions: Improving Access to Psychological Therapies provided a service that was probably cost-effective within the usual National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) threshold range of £20 000-30 000, but there was considerable uncertainty surrounding the costs and outcome differences.

Metacognitive theories describe relationships between mental-affective self-states, including the capacity of one self-state to reflect upon another self-state. The assimilation model is a metacognitive approach that understands self-states as made of traces of experiences at different levels of integration. Psychological problems are understood as impaired accessibility of certain self-states to the person's normal awareness. These states are distressing or otherwise subjectively problematic when they emerge. This exploratory study used the assimilation framework to describe mental states in 17 clients who participated in a clinical trial of cognitive-behavioral therapy for depression. Three clinically sophisticated raters examined transcripts of 1h-long psychotherapy session per client to construct qualitative descriptions of self-states and their relationship patterns in these depressed individuals. We then systematically compared and integrated these raters' descriptions of the clients' self-states. In each case, we found a conflict between two internally incompatible states: an interpersonally submissive state and an interpersonally dominant one, a pattern consistent with the model's theoretical description of depression., (Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Current guidelines for the management of depression suggest the use of guided self-help for patients with mild to moderate disorders. However, there is little consensus concerning the optimal form and delivery of this intervention. To develop acceptable and effective interventions, a phased process has been proposed, using a modelling phase to examine and develop an intervention prior to preliminary testing in an exploratory trial. This paper (a) describes the modelling phase used to develop a guided self-help intervention for depression in primary care and (b) reports data from an exploratory randomised trial of the intervention., Methods: A guided self-help intervention was developed following a modelling phase which involved a systematic review, meta synthesis and a consensus process. The intervention was then tested in an exploratory randomised controlled trial by examining (a) fidelity using analysis of taped guided self-help sessions (b) acceptability to patients and professionals through qualitative interviews (c) effectiveness through estimation of the intervention effect size., Results: Fifty eight patients were recruited to the exploratory trial. Seven professionals and nine patients were interviewed, and 22 tapes of sessions analysed for fidelity. Generally, fidelity to the intervention protocol was high, and the professionals delivered the majority of the specific components (with the exception of the use of feedback). Acceptability to both professionals and patients was also high. The effect size of the intervention on outcomes was small, and in line with previous analyses showing the modest effect of guided self-help in primary care. However, the sample size was small and confidence intervals around the effectiveness estimate were wide., Conclusion: The general principles of the modelling phase adopted in this study are designed to draw on a range of evidence, potentially providing an intervention that is evidence-based, patient-centred and acceptable to professionals. However, the pilot outcome data did not suggest that the intervention developed was particularly effective. The advantages and disadvantages of the general methods used in the modelling phase are discussed, and possible reasons for the failure to demonstrate a larger effect in this particular case are outlined.

Objective: This study aimed to explore the views of stakeholders including patients, general practitioners (GPs) and mental health workers on the feasibility, acceptability and barriers to a collaborative care model for treatment of depression within the context of U.K. primary health care., Method: We used semistructured interviews and focus groups with a purposive sample of 11 patients and 38 professionals from a wide selection of primary and secondary care mental health services, as well as framework analysis using a "constant comparative" approach to identify key concepts and themes., Results: Regular contact for patients with depression is acceptable and valued by both patients and professionals. However, patients value support, whereas professionals focus on information. To be acceptable to patients, contacts about medication or psychosocial support must minimize the potential for patient disempowerment. The use of the telephone is convenient and lends anonymity, but established mental health workers think it will impair their judgments. While patients merely identified the need for skilled case managers, GPs preferred established professionals; however, these workers did not see themselves in this role. All involved were cautious about deploying new workers. Additional barriers included practical and organizational issues., Conclusions: Although a telephone-delivered mix of medication support and low-intensity psychological intervention is generally acceptable, significant issues to be addressed include the values of the current mental health workforce, fears about new workers' experience and competence, the balance of face-to-face and telephone contacts and case manager education in nonspecific skills necessary to develop a therapeutic alliance, as well as the knowledge and skills required for education, medication support and behavioral activation. Qualitative research can add value to careful modeling of collaborative care prior to international implementation.

This study extended client-focused research by using the nearest neighbor (NN) approach, a client-specific sampling and prediction strategy derived from research on alpine avalanches. Psychotherapy clients (N=203) seen in routine practice settings in the United Kingdom completed a battery of intake measures and then completed symptom intensity ratings before each session. Forecasts of each client's rate of change and session-by-session variability were computed on the basis of that client's NNs (n=10-50 in different comparisons). Alternative forecasts used linear or log-linear slopes and were compared with an alternative prediction strategy. Results showed that the NN approach was superior to the alternative model in predicting rate of change, though the advantage was less clear for predicting variability., (((c) 2005 APA, all rights reserved).)

Sudden gains--large, enduring reductions in symptom intensity from one session to the next--were identified by T. Z. Tang and R. J. DeRubeis (1999b) on the basis of data from 2 manualized clinical trials of cognitive therapy for depression. The authors found similar sudden gains among clients with a variety of disorders treated with a variety of approaches in routine clinic settings. Clients (N = 135 who met inclusion criteria) completed short forms of the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (CORE-SF) preceding 7 to 74 individual sessions. Those who experienced sudden gains within their first 16 sessions (n = 23) had significantly lower CORE-SF scores in their final 3 sessions than did the other clients.

Objectives: The objective of the study was to investigate the administration and use of routine outcome monitoring session by session in the context of improving guided‐self‐help interventions when delivered remotely at Step 2 care in the English Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) services. Design: Qualitative research using recordings of telephone‐treatment sessions. Method: Participants (11 patients and 11 practitioners) were recruited from four nationally funded IAPT services and one‐third sector organisation commissioned to deliver Step 2 IAPT services, in England. Data collection took place prior to the COVID‐19 pandemic. Transcripts of telephone–treatment sessions were analysed using thematic analysis. Results: Four themes were identified: (1) lack of consistency in the administration of outcome measures (e.g. inconsistent wording); (2) outcome measures administered as a stand‐alone inflexible task (e.g. mechanical administration); (3) outcome measures as impersonal numbers (e.g. summarising, categorising and comparing total scores); and (4) missed opportunities to use outcome measures therapeutically (e.g. lack of therapeutic use of item and total scores). Conclusions: The administration of outcome measures needs to ensure validity and reliability. Therapeutic yield from session‐by‐session outcome measures could be enhanced by focusing on three main areas: (1) adopting a collaborative conversational approach, (2) maximising the use of total and items scores and (3) integrating outcome measures with in‐session treatment decisions. Shifting the perception of outcome measures as impersonal numbers to being process clinical tools ensures a personalised delivery of psychological interventions and has the potential to enhance engagement from practitioners and patients what may reduce drop‐out rates and improve clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite extensive literature examining perceptions of recovery from severe mental illness, literature focusing on recovery from depression in adults is limited. Aim: Systematically review the existing literature investigating patients' and clinicians' perceptions of, and factors associated with, recovery from depression. Method: Studies investigating perceptions of, and factors associated with, recovery from depression in adults were identified through database searches. Studies were assessed against inclusion criteria and quality rating checklists. Results: Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Recovery from depression is perceived as a complex, personal journey. The concept of normalised, biomedical definitions of recovery is not supported, with the construction of self and societal gender expectations identified by women as central to recovery. Recovery from depression was associated with higher levels of perceived social support and group memberships. A range of factors are identified as influencing recovery. However, physicians and patients prioritise different factors assessing what is important in being "cured" from depression. Conclusions: Recovery from depression is perceived by patients as a complex, personal process, influenced by a range of factors. However, greater understanding of clinicians' perceptions of client recovery from depression is essential to inform clinical practice and influence future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Health guidelines are developed to improve patient care by ensuring the most recent and 'best available evidence' is used to guide treatment recommendations. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence's ( NICE's ) guideline development methodology acknowledges that evidence needed to answer one question (treatment efficacy) may be different from evidence needed to answer another (cost-effectiveness, treatment acceptability to patients). This review uses counselling in the treatment of depression as a case study, and interrogates the constructs of 'best' evidence and 'best' guideline methodologies. Method The review comprises six sections: (i) implications of diverse definitions of counselling in research; (ii) research findings from meta-analyses and randomised controlled trials ( RCTs); (iii) limitations to trials-based evidence; (iv) findings from large routine outcome datasets; (v) the inclusion of qualitative research that emphasises service-user voices; and (vi) conclusions and recommendations. Results Research from meta-analyses and RCTs contained in the draft 2018 NICE Guideline is limited but positive in relation to the effectiveness of counselling in the treatment for depression. The weight of evidence suggests little, if any, advantage to cognitive behaviour therapy ( CBT) over counselling once risk of bias and researcher allegiance are taken into account. A growing body of evidence from large NHS data sets also evidences that, for depression, counselling is as effective as CBT and cost-effective when delivered in NHS settings. Conclusion Specifications in NICE's updated guideline procedures allow for data other than RCTs and meta-analyses to be included. Accordingly, there is a need to include large standardised collected data sets from routine practice as well as the voice of patients via high-quality qualitative research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The burden and severity of student mental health continue to increase in parallel with increasing financial pressures on students and services alike. There is a need for a student-specific measure of distress that acknowledges their unique context. This study examined the feasibility, acceptance, and initial psychometric properties of a US measure, the Counseling Center Assessment of Psychological Symptoms (CCAPS), in a UK student sample. Methods A sample of 294 UK help-seeking students from two universities completed the CCAPS-62 and Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (CORE-10) as a comparator. The factor solution and reliability of the CCAPS-62 were examined. Correlations and clinical boundaries were determined between the CCAPS-62 subscales and CORE-10, and comparisons were made with US published norms. Results The CCAPS-62 demonstrated a strong factor solution that matched the intended subscales. All subscales had good reliability and correlated significantly with the CORE-10. The agreement on caseness between the two measures was 92.8% with 86.3% reaching clinical threshold on both the CCAPS-62 and CORE-10. Severity was most noticeable for academic distress, depression, anxiety, and social anxiety. Compared to US data, UK students showed higher clinical severity for all psychological symptoms. Conclusions The CCAPS-62 is a reliable and psychometrically valid assessment measure to use with UK students without revision. The overall distress indicated is similar to that of the CORE-10, but the individual subscales are more informative of specific student concerns including academic distress, social anxiety, and substance abuse. Potential benefits of administering a student-focused assessment measure in student counselling services are discussed. Key Practitioner Message University students attending counselling in the UK demonstrate clinical severity for academic distress, depression, anxiety, and social anxiety., Compared to university students in the US, UK students present with higher clinical severity on all contextual measures of student psychological distress., It is advantageous for university counselling services to administer a student-specific clinical measure over measures intended for the general clinical population., CCAPS-62 is an acceptable, feasible, and psychometrically valid measure of student psychological distress that can be used in the UK without revision., It is important for university counselling services to continue to provide support from therapists that are trained and experienced in the university context over services intended for the general clinical population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is prevalent and without adequate treatment usually follows a chronic course. "High-intensity" cognitive-behaviour therapy (CBT) from a specialist therapist is current "best practice." However, access is difficult because of limited numbers of therapists and because of the disabling effects of OCD symptoms. There is a potential role for "low-intensity" interventions as part of a stepped care model. Low-intensity interventions (written or web-based materials with limited therapist support) can be provided remotely, which has the potential to increase access. However, current evidence concerning low-intensity interventions is insufficient. We aimed to determine the clinical effectiveness of 2 forms of low-intensity CBT prior to high-intensity CBT, in adults meeting the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) criteria for OCD.Methods and Findings: This study was approved by the National Research Ethics Service Committee North West-Lancaster (reference number 11/NW/0276). All participants provided informed consent to take part in the trial. We conducted a 3-arm, multicentre randomised controlled trial in primary- and secondary-care United Kingdom mental health services. All patients were on a waiting list for therapist-led CBT (treatment as usual). Four hundred and seventy-three eligible patients were recruited and randomised. Patients had a median age of 33 years, and 60% were female. The majority were experiencing severe OCD. Patients received 1 of 2 low-intensity interventions: computerised CBT (cCBT; web-based CBT materials and limited telephone support) through "OCFighter" or guided self-help (written CBT materials with limited telephone or face-to-face support). Primary comparisons concerned OCD symptoms, measured using the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale-Observer-Rated (Y-BOCS-OR) at 3, 6, and 12 months. Secondary outcomes included health-related quality of life, depression, anxiety, and functioning. At 3 months, guided self-help demonstrated modest benefits over the waiting list in reducing OCD symptoms (adjusted mean difference = -1.91, 95% CI -3.27 to -0.55). These effects did not reach a prespecified level of "clinically significant benefit." cCBT did not demonstrate significant benefit (adjusted mean difference = -0.71, 95% CI -2.12 to 0.70). At 12 months, neither guided self-help nor cCBT led to differences in OCD symptoms. Early access to low-intensity interventions led to significant reductions in uptake of high-intensity CBT over 12 months; 86% of the patients allocated to the waiting list for high-intensity CBT started treatment by the end of the trial, compared to 62% in supported cCBT and 57% in guided self-help. These reductions did not compromise longer-term patient outcomes. Data suggested small differences in satisfaction at 3 months, with patients more satisfied with guided self-help than supported cCBT. A significant issue in the interpretation of the results concerns the level of access to high-intensity CBT before the primary outcome assessment.Conclusions: We have demonstrated that providing low-intensity interventions does not lead to clinically significant benefits but may reduce uptake of therapist-led CBT.Trial Registration: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) Registry ISRCTN73535163. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (CBT) is the front-line psychological intervention for step 3 within UK psychological therapy services. Counselling is recommended only when other interventions have failed and its effectiveness has been questioned. Method: A secondary data analysis was conducted of data collected from 33,243 patients across 103 Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) services as part of the second round of the National Audit of Psychological Therapies (NAPT). Initial analysis considered levels of pre-post therapy effect sizes (ESs) and reliable improvement (RI) and reliable and clinically significant improvement (RCSI). Multilevel modelling was used to model predictors of outcome, namely patient pre-post change on PHQ-9 scores at last therapy session. Results: Counselling received more referrals from patients experiencing moderate to severe depression than CBT. For patients scoring above the clinical cut-off on the PHQ-9 at intake, the pre-post ES (95% CI) for CBT was 1.59 (1. 58, 1.62) with 46.6% making RCSI criteria and for counselling the pre-post ES was 1.55 (1.52, 1.59) with 44.3% of patients meeting RCSI criteria. Multilevel modelling revealed a significant site effect of 1.8%, while therapy type was not a predictor of outcome. A significant interaction was found between the number of sessions attended and therapy type, with patients attending fewer sessions on average for counselling [M = 7.5 (5.54) sessions and a median (IQR) of 6 (3-10)] than CBT [M = 8.9 (6.34) sessions and a median (IQR) of 7 (4-12)]. Only where patients had 18 or 20 sessions was CBT significantly more effective than counselling, with recovery rates (95% CIs) of 62.2% (57.1, 66.9) and 62.4% (56.5, 68.0) respectively, compared with 44.4% (32.7, 56.6) and 42.6% (30.0, 55.9) for counselling. Counselling was significantly more effective at two sessions with a recovery rate of 34.9% (31.9, 37.9) compared with 22.2% (20.5, 24.0) for CBT. Conclusions: Outcomes for counselling and CBT in the treatment of depression were comparable. Research efforts should focus on factors other than therapy type that may influence outcomes, namely the inherent variability between services, and adopt multilevel modelling as the given analytic approach in order to capture the naturally nested nature of the implementation and delivery of psychological therapies. It is of concern that half of all patients, regardless of type of intervention, did not show reliable improvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Psychotherapy Research is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: In the UK, bibliotherapy schemes have become a widespread source of support for people with common mental health disorders such as depression. However, the current evidence suggests that bibliotherapy schemes that are offered without guidance are not effective. It may be possible to improve the effectiveness of self-help books by incorporating into them some of the "common factors" that operate in personal therapeutic encounters, for example therapist responsiveness. Aim: The aim was to test whether and to what extent authors have incorporated common factors into self-help books. Method: A model of how common factors might be incorporated into CBT-based self-help books was developed and a sample of three books were examined against the model criteria. Results: The sampled self-help books were found to have common factors to a greater or lesser extent, but some types of common factors were more prevalent than others. Factors addressing the development and maintenance of the therapeutic alliance were less often apparent. Conclusions: Self-help books have the potential to provide a valuable service to people with depression, but further work is necessary to develop them. It is suggested that future generations of self-help books should pay explicit attention to the use of common factors, in particular developing and investigating how factors such as flexibility, responsiveness and alliance-rupture repair can be woven into the text. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The clinical and cost-effectiveness of a computer-aided cognitive behavioural therapy (CCBT) programme, Beating the Blues, is indicated by a number of studies, but relatively little is known about its acceptability for patients with depression, anxiety, or both. This study investigated the acceptability of Beating the Blues offered on eight scheduled clinic visits with brief face-to-face support. Pre and posttreatment measures explored the relationship among programme acceptability, treatment continuation, and outcomes for people accessing the programme in routine care. Two hundred and nineteen patients with depression, anxiety, or both were offered Beating the Blues in 11 primary and secondary care practices. One hundred and ninety-one (87%) completed the pretreatment measures and 84 (38%) completed a treatment feedback questionnaire. Analysis of treatment acceptability for CCBT indicated a positive patient experience with the programme. Pretreatment expectancies predicted CCBT treatment completion but not outcomes. No differences were found between men and women on pretreatment measures. Posttreatment, women reported more favourable responses to the therapy, finding the programme more helpful and more satisfactory, than did men. No relationship between treatment acceptability and age was found. Study limitations, including research methods and attrition rates, and implications for future research are discussed. It is concluded that the Beating the Blues CCBT programme is an acceptable treatment for common mental health problems in routine care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There has been little research into self-help books for people with depression, despite the apparent plethora of such titles. As an initial step, we undertook a scoping review of available books. Aim: To identify the number of self-help books for people with depression or mixed anxiety and depression that are available in the UK and to describe their principle characteristics. Methods: We located publicly available self-help books for people with depression or mixed anxiety and depression. We extracted data from the books we located that included descriptive information (including the psychological approach used), readability statistics and popularity measures. Results: We analysed data from 97 books. These publications were diverse in both structure and content. Structure and readability data illustrated that many potential readers may have difficulty using some of them. Popularity proved to be an unreliable way of locating books that would fulfil NICE guidance for a CBT based self-help programme. Conclusions: Many of the available books are complex to read in terms of literacy levels and may present additional problems given the concentration problems of people with depression. There is no relationship between popularity and a book being evidence-based or readable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using the assimilation model, we describe a theoretical paradox in which interpersonally assertive parts of the depressed person's personality are dominated and suppressed by parts that are interpersonally submissive and passive. We examine the relevance of this paradox to therapeutic work, focusing on a particularly helpful session (according to the therapist) from the case of Joan, a woman seen for depression in cognitive-behavioral therapy. We consider how the therapist intervened to enhance communication between the interpersonally submissive and dominant parts of Joan and discuss the implications of this process for therapy with such clients. © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Clin Psychol: In Session 63: 153–164, 2007. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Comparisons between bona fide psychological therapies generally report no effects or small effects favoring cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), suggesting that differences between therapy modalities are of little importance. An observational, cohort study of patients (N = 11,116), drawn from the English Talking Therapies program. Patients presented with depression and were treated by CBT or person-centered experiential therapy (PCET), 67 % were female and the age range was 15–94. Multilevel modeling was used to identify variables associated with outcomes and CBT and PCET outcomes were compared dependent on the number of sessions patients attended and the severity of their depression at intake. Although overall a small effect size of 0.14 (0.10, 0.18) favored CBT, we found differing effect sizes depending on patient severity and the number of sessions they had attended at outcome. For non-clinical and moderately depressed patients no significant differences between therapies were found. For moderately-severe and severe patients there was a crossover in effectiveness with PCET more effective up to 5 or 6 sessions and CBT more effective thereafter. However, small effects in favour of PCET were unreliable. The largest effects were found for CBT for patients who were moderately-severe and had >10 sessions (d = 0.30, 0.12, 0.48) or were severe and had >12 sessions (d = 0.26 (0.02, 0.49). No data was available on therapy allocation decisions or therapists and the results may not be generalizable to non-NHS Talking Therapies services. Small effects can mask important contextual differences between therapies and their study can inform allocation decisions. • The benefits of longer therapy duration were moderated by therapy type • Little difference between PCET and CBT for non-clinical or moderately depressed patients • The therapy type*sessions interaction yielded a crossover in effectiveness in the full sample and the more severe subgroups • CBT especially effective with moderately-severe and severely depressed patients who had over 10 sessions • Small effects translate to large numbers of patients in large routine services [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is increased emphasis on routine assessment of depression in primary care. This report is the first UK validation of two self-completed measures: the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation - Outcome Measure (CORE-OM). Optimum cut-off points were established against a diagnostic gold standard in 93 patients. PHQ-9 sensitivity = 91.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 77.5 to 98.3%) and specificity 78.3% (95% CI = 65.8 to 87.9%). CORE-OM sensitivity = 91.7% (95% CI = 77.5 to 98.2%) and specificity = 76.7% (95% CI = 64.0 to 86,6%). Brief self-rated questionnaires are as good as clinician-administered instruments in detecting depression in UK primary care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AbstractFeedback-informed treatment (FIT) has been shown to reduce the gap between more and less effective therapists. This study aimed to examine therapists’ professional characteristics as potential moderators of the effect of feedback on treatment outcomes.The IAPT-FIT Trial was a clinical trial where therapists were randomly assigned to a FIT group or a usual care control group. Treatment response was monitored using measures of depression (PHQ-9), anxiety (GAD-7) and functional impairment (WSAS). In a secondary analysis of this trial (n = 1,835 patients; t = 67 therapists), we used multilevel modelling to examine interactions between therapists’ professional characteristics (e.g., attitude towards and self-efficacy regarding feedback utilization, decision-making style, job satisfaction, burnout, difficulties in practice, coping styles, caseload size) with random allocation (FIT vs. controls) to identify moderators of the effects of feedback.Between 9.6% and 10.8% of variability in treatment outcomes was attributable to therapist effects. Therapist-level caseload sizes and external feedback propensity (EFP) moderated the effect of feedback on depression outcomes. No statistically significant main effects were found for any of the included therapist characteristics.FIT reduced variability in outcomes between therapists and was particularly effective for therapists with high EFP and larger caseloads. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective Method Results Conclusion To develop two prediction algorithms recommending person-centered experiential therapy (PCET) or cognitive–behavioral therapy (CBT) for patients with depression: (1) a full data model using multiple trial-based and routine variables, and (2) a routine data model using only variables available in the English NHS Talking Therapies program.Data was used from the PRaCTICED trial comparing PCET vs. CBT for 255 patients meeting a diagnosis of moderate or severe depression. Separate full and routine data models were derived and the latter tested in an external data sample.The full data model provided the better prediction, yielding a significant difference in outcome between patients receiving their optimal vs. non-optimal treatment at 6- (Cohen’s d = .65 [.40, .91]) and 12 months (d = .85 [.59, 1.10]) post-randomization. The routine data model performed similarly in the training and test samples with non-significant effect sizes, d = .19 [−.05, .44] and d = .21 [−.00, .43], respectively. For patients with the strongest treatment matching (d ≥ 0.3), the resulting effect size was significant, d = .38 [.11, 64].A treatment selection algorithm might be used to recommend PCET or CBT. Although the overall effects were small, targeted matching yielded somewhat larger effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background This was a multi-service evaluation of the clinical and organisational effectiveness of large group psychoeducational CBT delivered within a stepped care model. Method Clinical outcomes for 4451 participants in 163 psychoeducational groups delivered across 5 services were analysed by calculating pre-post treatment anxiety (GAD-7) effect sizes (Cohen's d ). Overall and between-service effects were compared to published efficacy benchmarks. Multilevel modelling was used to examine if variability in clinical outcomes was explained by differences in service, group and patient-level (case-mix) variables. Results The pooled GAD-7 (pre-post) effect size for all services was d = 0.70, which was consistent with efficacy benchmarks for guided self-help interventions ( d = 0.69). One service had significantly smaller effects ( d = 0.48), which was explained by differences in group treatment length and case-mix. Variability between groups (i.e., group effects ) explained up to 3.6% of variance in treatment outcomes. Conclusions Large group psychoeducational CBT is clinically effective, organisationally efficient and consistent with a stepped care approach to service design. Clinical outcome differences between services were explained by group and patient variables. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]