Helen Waller1, Sabine Landau2, Miriam Fornells-Ambrojo3, Suzanne Jolley4, Paul McCrone5, Rikesh Halkoree6, Nedah Basit6, Catherine Iredale6, Catherine Tunnard7, Darshan Zala5, Tom J K Craig5, Philippa Garety4. 1. Department of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK; South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, UK. Electronic address: helen.harding@kcl.ac.uk. 2. Department of Biostatistics, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK. 3. Department of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK; University College London, UK; South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, UK. 4. Department of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK. 5. Department of Health Service and Population Research, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK. 6. South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, UK. 7. University College London, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is a pressing need to improve access to evidence-based practice for people with psychosis. The primary aim of this study was to assess clinical feasibility of a manualised, evidence-based CBT intervention (GOALS) targeting a personalised recovery goal, delivered by the frontline workforce, following brief training. Secondly, we aimed to conduct preliminary statistical analyses of key outcomes and costs. METHODS: The GOALS study is a feasibility randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN 73188383). 75 participants with current psychosis were recruited and randomly allocated to receive either treatment as usual alone or with GOALS therapy. RESULTS: Brief training enabled frontline staff to deliver the therapy according to protocol and 74% of therapy participants partially or fully achieved their goals. There were significant improvements with a moderate effect size of 0.56 on goal attainment. However, preliminary statistical analyses found no significant differences between groups on our primary outcome of activity levels or other secondary outcomes Health economic analysis found that point estimates of costs, controlling for baseline costs, implied savings (even including intervention costs), but the difference was not statistically significant. LIMITATIONS: The study was designed as a feasibility RCT, and therefore the results of secondary estimates of efficacy effects should be treated with caution. CONCLUSIONS: This approach holds promise in supporting people with psychosis to reach personal recovery goals, cost effectively.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is a pressing need to improve access to evidence-based practice for people with psychosis. The primary aim of this study was to assess clinical feasibility of a manualised, evidence-based CBT intervention (GOALS) targeting a personalised recovery goal, delivered by the frontline workforce, following brief training. Secondly, we aimed to conduct preliminary statistical analyses of key outcomes and costs. METHODS: The GOALS study is a feasibility randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN 73188383). 75 participants with current psychosis were recruited and randomly allocated to receive either treatment as usual alone or with GOALS therapy. RESULTS: Brief training enabled frontline staff to deliver the therapy according to protocol and 74% of therapy participants partially or fully achieved their goals. There were significant improvements with a moderate effect size of 0.56 on goal attainment. However, preliminary statistical analyses found no significant differences between groups on our primary outcome of activity levels or other secondary outcomes Health economic analysis found that point estimates of costs, controlling for baseline costs, implied savings (even including intervention costs), but the difference was not statistically significant. LIMITATIONS: The study was designed as a feasibility RCT, and therefore the results of secondary estimates of efficacy effects should be treated with caution. CONCLUSIONS: This approach holds promise in supporting people with psychosis to reach personal recovery goals, cost effectively.
Authors: Robert Dudley; Guy Dodgson; Stephanie Common; Lucy O'Grady; Florence Watson; Christopher Gibbs; Bronia Arnott; Charles Fernyhough; Ben Alderson-Day; Emmanuel Ogundimu; Ehsan Kharatikoopaei; Victoria Patton; Charlotte Aynsworth Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-05-16 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Mark Hayward; Clio Berry; Ben Cameron; Kate Arnold; Katherine Berry; Stephen Bremner; Kate Cavanagh; David Fowler; Heather Gage; Kathryn Greenwood; Cassie Hazell; Anna-Marie Jones; Sam Robertson; Clara Strauss Journal: Trials Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 2.279