Search

Objectives: (1) To explore the role of ethnicity in receiving cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) for people with psychosis or bipolar disorder while adjusting for differences in risk profiles and symptom severity. (2) To assess whether context of treatment (inpatient vs community) impacts on the relationship between ethnicity and access to CBT., Design: Cohort study of case register data from one catchment area (January 2007-July 2017)., Setting: A large secondary care provider serving an ethnically diverse population in London., Participants: Data extracted for 30 497 records of people who had diagnoses of bipolar disorder (International Classification of Diseases (ICD) code F30-1) or psychosis (F20-F29 excluding F21). Exclusion criteria were: <15 years old, missing data and not self-defining as belonging to one of the larger ethnic groups. The sample (n=20 010) comprised the following ethnic groups: white British: n=10 393; Black Caribbean: n=5481; Black African: n=2817; Irish: n=570; and 'South Asian' people (consisting of Indian, Pakistani and Bangladeshi people): n=749., Outcome Assessments: ORs for receipt of CBT (single session or full course) as determined via multivariable logistic regression analyses., Results: In models adjusted for risk and severity variables, in comparison with White British people; Black African people were less likely to receive a single session of CBT (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.82, p<0.001); Black Caribbean people were less likely to receive a minimum of 16-sessions of CBT (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.98, p=0.03); Black African and Black Caribbean people were significantly less likely to receive CBT while inpatients (respectively, OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.89, p=0.001; OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.94, p=0.003)., Conclusions: This study highlights disparity in receipt of CBT from a large provider of secondary care in London for Black African and Caribbean people and that the context of therapy (inpatient vs community settings) has a relationship with disparity in access to treatment., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SLaM and its services have had no role, in the study design, in the analysis and interpretation of the data, in the writing of the report, or in the decision to submit the paper for publication. Caroline Cupitt is employed by SLaM and works within one of SLaM’s services which has produced some of the clinical notes that form part of the data analysed herein. RS declares research funding within the last 5 years from Roche, GSK and Janssen., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)