Understanding complexity in psychological services: A modified Delphi study.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The concept of patient or case complexity is relevant-and widely used-at all levels and stages of mental health service provision, but there have been few methodologically robust attempts to define this term. This study aimed to establish a consensus on factors contributing to patient complexity in adult psychological services using Delphi methodology. METHOD: Applied psychologists in a single urban/suburban UK National Health Service setting took part in a three-round modified Delphi study. Twenty-eight respondents in Round 1 gave qualitative data on factors they considered when assessing complexity, which was subject to thematic analysis. Twenty-five respondents in Round 2 rated how central/peripheral each theme was to their judgement using Likert scales. In a third round, 20 respondents addressed discrepancies and possible utilities of the emerging framework. RESULTS: Thirteen factors contributing to patient/case complexity (active severe/enduring mental health, current coping/functioning, engagement, forensic history, iatrogenic factors, interpersonal functioning, neurocognitive functioning, physical health, problematic substance use, risk, severity/chronicity of presenting problems, systemic and socioeconomic factors and trauma) were identified with a high degree of consensus. All were rated as central to complexity. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that applied psychologists do have a shared understanding of complexity and make recommendations for further research validating, developing and applying this empirically derived framework.

Brief Engagement and Acceptance Coaching for Hospice Settings (the BEACHeS study): results from a Phase I study of acceptability and initial effectiveness in people with non-curative cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Transitioning into palliative care is psychologically demanding for people with advanced cancer, and there is a need for acceptable and effective interventions to support this. We aimed to develop and pilot test a brief Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) based intervention to improve quality of life and distress. METHODS: Our mixed-method design included: (i) quantitative effectiveness testing using Single Case Experimental Design (SCED), (ii) qualitative interviews with participants, and (iii) focus groups with hospice staff. The five-session, in-person intervention was delivered to 10 participants; five completed at least 80%. RESULTS: At baseline, participants reported poor quality of life but low distress. Most experienced substantial physical health deterioration during the study. SCED analysis methods did not show conclusively significant effects, but there was some indication that outcome improvement followed changes in expected intervention processes variables. Quantitative and qualitative data together demonstrates acceptability, perceived effectiveness and safety of the intervention. Qualitative interviews and focus groups were also used to gain feedback on intervention content and to make design recommendations to maximise success of later feasibility trials. CONCLUSIONS: This study adds to the growing evidence base for ACT in people with advanced cancer. A number of potential intervention mechanisms, for example a distress-buffering hypothesis, are raised by our data and these should be addressed in future research using randomised controlled trial designs. Our methodological recommendations-including recruiting non-cancer diagnoses, and earlier in the treatment trajectory-likely apply more broadly to the delivery of psychological intervention in the palliative care setting. This study was pre-registered on the Open Science Framework (Ref: 46,033) and retrospectively registered on the ISRCTN registry (Ref: ISRCTN12084782).

Brief Engagement and Acceptance Coaching for Community and Hospice Settings (the BEACHeS Study): Protocol for the development and pilot testing of an evidence-based psychological intervention to enhance wellbeing and aid transition into palliative care.

BACKGROUND: Cancer affects millions of individuals globally, with a mortality rate of over eight million people annually. Although palliative care is often provided outside of specialist services, many people require, at some point in their illness journey, support from specialist palliative care services, for example, those provided in hospice settings. This transition can be a time of uncertainty and fear, and there is a need for effective interventions to meet the psychological and supportive care needs of people with cancer that cannot be cured. Whilst Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) has been shown to be effective across diverse health problems, robust evidence for its effectiveness in palliative cancer populations is not extensive. METHOD: This mixed-methods study uses a single-case experimental design with embedded qualitative interviews to pilot test a novel intervention for this patient group. Between 14 and 20 patients will be recruited from two hospices in England and Scotland. Participants will receive five face-to-face manualised sessions with a psychological therapist. Sessions are structured around teaching core ACT skills (openness, awareness and engagement) as a way to deal effectively with challenges of transition into specialist palliative care services. Outcome measures include cancer-specific quality of life (primary outcome) and distress (secondary outcome), which are assessed alongside measures of psychological flexibility. Daily diary outcome assessments will be taken for key measures, alongside more detailed weekly self-report, through baseline, intervention and 1-month follow-up phases. After follow-up, participants will be invited to take part in a qualitative interview to understand their experience of taking part and acceptability and perceived effectiveness of the intervention and its components. DISCUSSION: This study is the first investigation of using ACT with terminally ill patients at the beginning of their transition into palliative treatment. Using in-depth single-case approaches, we will refine and manualise intervention content by the close of the study for use in follow-up research trials. Our long-term goal is then to test the intervention as delivered by non-psychologist specialist palliative care practitioners thus broadening the potential relevance of the approach. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework, 46033. Registered 19 April 2018.