Controlled Clinical Trial of a Self-Help for Anxiety Intervention for Patients Waiting for Psychological Therapy

Evaluation of a complex intervention (Engager) for prisoners with common mental health problems, near to and after release: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

The 'Engager' programme is a 'through-the-gate' intervention designed to support prisoners with common mental health problems as they transition from prison back into the community. The trial will evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the Engager intervention.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The study is a parallel two-group randomised controlled trial with 1:1 individual allocation to either: (a) the Engager intervention plus standard care (intervention group) or (b) standard care alone (control group) across two investigation centres (South West and North West of England). Two hundred and eighty prisoners meeting eligibility criteria will take part. Engager is a person-centred complex intervention delivered by practitioners and aimed at addressing offenders' mental health and social care needs. It comprises one-to-one support for participants prior to release from prison and for up to 20 weeks postrelease. The primary outcome is change in psychological distress measured by the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation-Outcome Measure at 6 months postrelease. Secondary outcomes include: assessment of subjective met/unmet need, drug and alcohol use, health-related quality of life and well-being-related quality of life measured at 3, 6 and 12 months postrelease; change in objective social domains, drug and alcohol dependence, service utilisation and perceived helpfulness of services and change in psychological constructs related to desistence at 6 and 12 months postrelease; and recidivism at 12 months postrelease. A process evaluation will assess fidelity of intervention delivery, test hypothesised mechanisms of action and look for unintended consequences. An economic evaluation will estimate the cost-effectiveness.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has been approved by the Wales Research Ethics Committee 3 (ref: 15/WA/0314) and the National Offender Management Service (ref: 2015-283). Findings will be disseminated to commissioners, clinicians and service users via papers and presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN11707331; Pre-results.

Decision Making in Stepped Care: How Do Therapists Decide Whether to Prolong Treatment or Not?

Background: The efficiency of stepped care systems partly relies on systematic monitoring of patient outcomes and timely decisions to “step up” patients without any clear therapeutic gains to the next level of treatment. Qualitative evidence has suggested that this does not occur consistently, nor always congruently with clinical guidelines. Aims: To investigate factors that influence psychological therapists’ decisions to prolong or to conclude treatment in cases with little evidence of therapeutic gains. Method: Eighty-two clinicians in stepped care services completed questionnaires about the likelihood of “holding” non-improving patients in treatment, and factors associated with referrals and holding (FARAH-Q). The factor structure, internal consistency and test-retest reliability of the measures was examined prior to assessing correlations between FARAH-Q items and likelihood of holding. Results: A 4-factor solution indicated that clinicians’ decision making is influenced by a complex interplay between beliefs, attitudes, subjective norms and self-efficacy. Correlational analysis indicated that holding is more likely to happen if there are perceived barriers to refer the patient for further treatment, if the therapist likes the patient and has a good therapeutic alliance, and if the therapist feels confident that s/he has the ability to achieve a positive outcome by prolonging treatment. Conclusions: Decisions to prolong or conclude treatment are not only influenced by evidence and guidelines, but also subjective beliefs, norms and attitudes. Understanding this decision making process is relevant to clinicians and supervisors interested in enhancing the efficiency of stepped care.

Media-delivered cognitive behavioural therapy and behavioural therapy (self-help) for anxiety disorders in adults

BACKGROUND

Anxiety disorders are the most common mental health problems. They are chronic and unremitting. Effective treatments are available, but access to services is limited. Media-delivered behavioural and cognitive behavioural interventions (self-help) aim to deliver treatment with less input from professionals compared with traditional therapies.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of media-delivered behavioural and cognitive behavioural therapies for anxiety disorders in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

Published and unpublished studies were considered without restriction by language or date. The Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group's Specialized Register (CCDANCTR) was searched all years to 1 January 2013. The CCDANCTR includes relevant randomised controlled trials from the following bibliographic databases: The Cochrane Library (all years), EMBASE (1974 to date), MEDLINE (1950 to date) and PsycINFO (1967 to date). Complementary searches were carried out on Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to 23 February 2013) and PsycINFO (1987 to February, Week 2, 2013), together with International trial registries (the trials portal of the World Health Organization (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov). Reference lists from previous meta-analyses and reports of randomised controlled trials were checked, and authors were contacted for unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of media-delivered behavioural or cognitive behavioural therapy in adults with anxiety disorders (other than post-traumatic stress disorder) compared with no intervention (including attention/relaxation controls) or compared with face-to-face therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Both review authors independently screened titles and abstracts. Study characteristics and outcomes were extracted in duplicate. Outcomes were combined using random-effects models, and tests for heterogeneity and for small study bias were conducted. We examined subgroup differences by type of disorder, type of intervention provided, type of media, and recruitment methods used.

MAIN RESULTS

One hundred and one studies with 8403 participants were included; 92 studies were included in the quantitative synthesis. These trials compared several types of media-delivered interventions (with varying levels of support) with no treatment and with face-to-face interventions. Inconsistency and risk of bias reduced our confidence in the overall results. For the primary outcome of symptoms of anxiety, moderate-quality evidence showed medium effects compared with no intervention (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55 to 0.80; 72 studies, 4537 participants), and low-quality evidence of small effects favoured face-to-face therapy (SMD -0.23, 95% CI -0.36 to -0.09; 24 studies, 1360 participants). The intervention was associated with greater response than was seen with no treatment (risk ratio (RR) 2.34, 95% CI 1.81 to 3.03; 21 studies, 1547 participants) and was not significantly inferior to face-to-face therapy in these studies (RR 0.78, 95 % CI 0.56 to 1.09; 10 studies, 575 participants), but the latter comparison included versions of therapies that were not as comprehensive as those provided in routine clinical practice. Evidence suggested benefit for secondary outcome measures (depression, mental-health related disability, quality of life and dropout), but this evidence was of low to moderate quality. Evidence regarding harm was lacking.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Self-help may be useful for people who are not able or are not willing to use other services for people with anxiety disorders; for people who can access it, face-to-face cognitive behavioural therapy is probably clinically superior. Economic analyses were beyond the scope of this review.Important heterogeneity was noted across trials. Recent interventions for specific problems that incorporate clinician support may be more effective than transdiagnostic interventions (i.e. interventions for multiple disorders) provided with no guidance, but these issues are confounded in the available trials.Although many small trials have been conducted, the generalisability of their findings is limited. Most interventions tested are not available to consumers. Self-help has been recommended as the first step in the treatment of some anxiety disorders, but the short-term and long-term effectiveness of media-delivered interventions has not been established. Large, pragmatic trials are needed to evaluate and to maximise the benefits of self-help interventions.

The clinical effectiveness of CBT-based guided self-help interventions for anxiety and depressive disorders: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT)-based guided self-help (GSH) has been suggested to be an effective intervention for mild to moderate anxiety and depression, yet the evidence seems inconclusive, with some studies reporting that GSH is effective and others finding that GSH is ineffective. GSH differs in important respects from other levels of self-help, yet the literature regarding exclusively guided self-help interventions for anxiety and depression has not been reviewed systematically.

METHOD

A literature search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining CBT-based GSH interventions for anxiety and depressive disorders was conducted. Multiple electronic databases were searched; several journals spanning key disciplines were hand-searched; reference lists of included review articles were scanned and relevant first authors were contacted.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis indicated the effectiveness of GSH at post-treatment, although GSH was found to have limited effectiveness at follow-up or among more clinically representative samples. Studies that reported greater effectiveness of GSH tended to be of lower methodological quality and generally involved participants who were self-selected rather than recruited through clinical referrals.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there is support for the effectiveness of CBT-based GSH among media-recruited individuals, the finding that the reviewed RCTs had limited effectiveness within routine clinical practice demonstrates that the evidence is not conclusive. Further rigorous evidence based on clinical populations that examines longer-term outcomes is required before CBT-based GSH interventions can be deemed effective for adults accessing primary care services for treatment of anxiety and depression.

Analysis of syntax and word use to predict successful participation in guided self-help for anxiety and depression

This study investigated whether an analysis of narrative style (word use and cross-clausal syntax) of patients with symptoms of generalised anxiety and depression disorders can help predict the likelihood of successful participation in guided self-help. Texts by 97 people who had made contact with a primary care mental health service were analysed. Outcome measures were completion of the guided self-help programme, and change in symptoms assessed by a standardised scale (CORE-OM). Regression analyses indicated that some aspects of participants' syntax helped to predict completion of the programme, and that aspects of syntax and word use helped to predict improvement of symptoms. Participants using non-finite complement clauses with above-average frequency were four times more likely to complete the programme (95% confidence interval 1.4 to 11.7) than other participants. Among those who completed, the use of causation words and complex syntax (adverbial clauses) predicted improvement, accounting for 50% of the variation in well-being benefit. These results suggest that the analysis of narrative style can provide useful information for assessing the likelihood of success of individuals participating in a mental health guided self-help programme.

Efficacy of self-administered treatments for pathological academic worry: A randomized controlled trial

Research on treatments for reducing pathological worry is limited. In particular, academic worry is a common theme in generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) samples as well as non-clinical student samples. Given the high cost of anxiety disorders to society, research is needed to examine the efficacy of self-administered treatments designed to reduce pathological worry. The primary goal of this study was to investigate the benefits of three self-administered interventions for reducing academic worry. College students (N = 113) experiencing clinically significant academic worry were randomized to either: (a) worry exposure (WE); (b) expressive writing (EW); (c) relaxation consisting of pulsed audio-photic stimulation (APS); or (d) waitlist control (WLC). Participants were instructed to practice their interventions three times per week for one month and completed home practice logs online to track treatment adherence. Academic worry, general anxiety, and perceived stress were assessed at baseline and post-treatment. Academic worry and general anxiety were also assessed at a three-month follow-up. Those assigned to the WE and APS conditions showed significant improvement relative to EW and WLC at post-treatment. All treatment conditions showed continued improvement by follow-up, with no between-group differences. Treatment and public health implications are discussed.