Effectiveness of Self-guided Tailored Implementation Strategies in Integrating and Embedding Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in Routine Mental Health Care: Results of a Multicenter Stepped-Wedge Cluster Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (iCBT) services for common mental health disorders have been found to be effective. There is a need for strategies that improve implementation in routine practice. One-size-fits-all strategies are likely to be ineffective. Tailored implementation is considered as a promising approach. The self-guided integrated theory-based Framework for intervention tailoring strategies toolkit (ItFits-toolkit) supports local implementers in developing tailored implementation strategies. Tailoring involves identifying local barriers; matching selected barriers to implementation strategies; developing an actionable work plan; and applying, monitoring, and adapting where necessary.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of the ItFits-toolkit with implementation-as-usual (IAU) in implementing iCBT services in 12 routine mental health care organizations in 9 countries in Europe and Australia.

METHODS

A stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial design with repeated measures was applied. The trial period lasted 30 months. The primary outcome was the normalization of iCBT delivery by service providers (therapists, referrers, IT developers, and administrators), which was measured with the Normalization Measure Development as a proxy for implementation success. A 3-level linear mixed-effects modeling was applied to estimate the effects. iCBT service uptake (referral and treatment completion rates) and implementation effort (hours) were used as secondary outcomes. The perceived satisfaction (Client Satisfaction Questionnaire), usability (System Usability Scale), and impact of the ItFits-toolkit by implementers were used to assess the acceptability of the ItFits-toolkit.

RESULTS

In total, 456 mental health service providers were included in this study. Compared with IAU, the ItFits-toolkit had a small positive statistically significant effect on normalization levels in service providers (mean 0.09, SD 0.04; P=.02; Cohen d=0.12). The uptake of iCBT by patients was similar to that of IAU. Implementers did not spend more time on implementation work when using the ItFits-toolkit and generally regarded the ItFits-toolkit as usable and were satisfied with it.

CONCLUSIONS

The ItFits-toolkit performed better than the usual implementation activities in implementing iCBT services in routine practice. There is practical utility in the ItFits-toolkit for supporting implementers in developing and applying effective tailored implementation strategies. However, the effect on normalization levels among mental health service providers was small. These findings warrant modesty regarding the effectiveness of self-guided tailored implementation of iCBT services in routine practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03652883; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03652883.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR2-10.1186/s13063-020-04686-4.

Examining the Theoretical Framework of Behavioral Activation for Major Depressive Disorder: Smartphone-Based Ecological Momentary Assessment Study

BACKGROUND

Behavioral activation (BA), either as a stand-alone treatment or as part of cognitive behavioral therapy, has been shown to be effective for treating depression. The theoretical underpinnings of BA derive from Lewinsohn et al's theory of depression. The central premise of BA is that having patients engage in more pleasant activities leads to them experiencing more pleasure and elevates their mood, which, in turn, leads to further (behavioral) activation. However, there is a dearth of empirical evidence about the theoretical framework of BA.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to examine the assumed (temporal) associations of the 3 constructs in the theoretical framework of BA.

METHODS

Data were collected as part of the "European Comparative Effectiveness Research on Internet-based Depression Treatment versus treatment-as-usual" trial among patients who were randomly assigned to receive blended cognitive behavioral therapy (bCBT). As part of bCBT, patients completed weekly assessments of their level of engagement in pleasant activities, the pleasure they experienced as a result of these activities, and their mood over the course of the treatment using a smartphone-based ecological momentary assessment (EMA) application. Longitudinal cross-lagged and cross-sectional associations of 240 patients were examined using random intercept cross-lagged panel models.

RESULTS

The analyses did not reveal any statistically significant cross-lagged coefficients (all P>.05). Statistically significant cross-sectional positive associations between activities, pleasure, and mood levels were identified. Moreover, the levels of engagement in activities, pleasure, and mood slightly increased over the duration of the treatment. In addition, mood seemed to carry over, over time, while both levels of engagement in activities and pleasurable experiences did not.

CONCLUSIONS

The results were partially in accordance with the theoretical framework of BA, insofar as the analyses revealed cross-sectional relationships between levels of engagement in activities, pleasurable experiences deriving from these activities, and enhanced mood. However, given that no statistically significant temporal relationships were revealed, no conclusions could be drawn about potential causality. A shorter measurement interval (eg, daily rather than weekly EMA reports) might be more attuned to detecting potential underlying temporal pathways. Future research should use an EMA methodology to further investigate temporal associations, based on theory and how treatments are presented to patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02542891, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02542891; German Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00006866, https://tinyurl.com/ybja3xz7; Netherlands Trials Register, NTR4962, https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/4838; ClinicalTrials.Gov, NCT02389660, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02389660; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02361684, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02361684; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02449447, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02449447; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02410616, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02410616; ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN12388725, https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN12388725.