David A Richards1, Gunilla Borglin. 1. Mood Disorders Centre, College of Life and Environmental Science, University of Exeter, Exeter EX4 4QG, United Kingdom. D.A.Richards@exeter.ac.uk
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Worldwide, health systems are improving access to empirically supported psychological therapies for anxiety and depression. Evaluations of this effort are limited by the cross sectional nature of studies, short implementation periods, poor data completeness rates and lack of clinically significant and reliable change metrics. OBJECTIVE: Assess the impact of implementing stepped care empirically supported psychological therapies by measuring the prospective outcomes of patients referred over a two year period to one Improving Access to Psychological Therapies service in the UK. METHOD: We collected demographic, therapeutic and outcome data on depression (PHQ-9) and anxiety (GAD-7) from 7859 consecutive patients for 24 months between 1st July 2006 and 31st August 2008, following up these patients for a further one year. RESULTS: 4183 patients (53%) received two or more treatment sessions. Uncontrolled effect size for depression was 1.07 (95% CI: 0.88 to 1.29) and for anxiety was 1.04 (0.88 to 1.23). 55.4% of treated patients met reliable improvement or reliable and clinically significant change criteria for depression, 54.7% for anxiety. Patients received a mean of 5.5 sessions over 3.5h, mainly low-intensity CBT and phone based case management. Attrition was high with 47% of referrals either not attending for an assessment or receiving an assessment only. CONCLUSIONS: Recovery rates for patients receiving stepped care empirically supported treatments for anxiety and depression in routine practice are 40 to 46%. Only half of all patients referred go on to receive treatment. Further work is needed to improve routine engagement of patients with anxiety and depression.
INTRODUCTION: Worldwide, health systems are improving access to empirically supported psychological therapies for anxiety and depression. Evaluations of this effort are limited by the cross sectional nature of studies, short implementation periods, poor data completeness rates and lack of clinically significant and reliable change metrics. OBJECTIVE: Assess the impact of implementing stepped care empirically supported psychological therapies by measuring the prospective outcomes of patients referred over a two year period to one Improving Access to Psychological Therapies service in the UK. METHOD: We collected demographic, therapeutic and outcome data on depression (PHQ-9) and anxiety (GAD-7) from 7859 consecutive patients for 24 months between 1st July 2006 and 31st August 2008, following up these patients for a further one year. RESULTS: 4183 patients (53%) received two or more treatment sessions. Uncontrolled effect size for depression was 1.07 (95% CI: 0.88 to 1.29) and for anxiety was 1.04 (0.88 to 1.23). 55.4% of treated patients met reliable improvement or reliable and clinically significant change criteria for depression, 54.7% for anxiety. Patients received a mean of 5.5 sessions over 3.5h, mainly low-intensity CBT and phone based case management. Attrition was high with 47% of referrals either not attending for an assessment or receiving an assessment only. CONCLUSIONS: Recovery rates for patients receiving stepped care empirically supported treatments for anxiety and depression in routine practice are 40 to 46%. Only half of all patients referred go on to receive treatment. Further work is needed to improve routine engagement of patients with anxiety and depression.
Authors: J Randall Curtis; Paul S Ciechanowski; Lois Downey; Julia Gold; Elizabeth L Nielsen; Sarah E Shannon; Patsy D Treece; Jessica P Young; Ruth A Engelberg Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2012-07-06 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: David A Richards; Peter Bower; Christina Pagel; Alice Weaver; Martin Utley; John Cape; Steve Pilling; Karina Lovell; Simon Gilbody; Judy Leibowitz; Lilian Owens; Roger Paxton; Sue Hennessy; Angela Simpson; Steve Gallivan; David Tomson; Christos Vasilakis Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2012-01-16 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: J Randall Curtis; Patsy D Treece; Elizabeth L Nielsen; Julia Gold; Paul S Ciechanowski; Sarah E Shannon; Nita Khandelwal; Jessica P Young; Ruth A Engelberg Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2016-01-15 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: J Randall Curtis; Lois Downey; Anthony L Back; Elizabeth L Nielsen; Sudiptho Paul; Alexandria Z Lahdya; Patsy D Treece; Priscilla Armstrong; Ronald Peck; Ruth A Engelberg Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2018-07-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Jane McCusker; Martin Cole; Mark Yaffe; Tamara Sussman; Kim L Lavoie; Erin Strumpf; Maida Sewitch; Deniz Sahin; Manon de Raad Journal: Ment Health Fam Med Date: 2012-12
Authors: Nathalie Moise; Louise Falzon; Megan Obi; Siqin Ye; Sapana Patel; Christopher Gonzalez; Kelsey Bryant; Ian M Kronish Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2018-08-14 Impact factor: 5.128