Individual treatment selection for patients with post-traumatic stress disorder: External validation of a personalised advantage index.

OBJECTIVE: To test the predictive accuracy and generalisability of a personalised advantage index (PAI) model designed to support treatment selection for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). METHOD: A PAI model developed by Deisenhofer et al. (2018) was used to predict treatment outcomes in a statistically independent dataset including archival records for N = 152 patients with PSTD who accessed either trauma-focussed cognitive behavioural therapy or eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing in routine care. Outcomes were compared between patients who received their PAI-indicated optimal treatment versus those who received their suboptimal treatment. RESULTS: The model did not yield treatment specific predictions and patients who had received their PAI-indicated optimal treatment did not have better treatment outcomes in this external validation sample. CONCLUSION: This PAI model did not generalise to an external validation sample.

Using Progress Feedback to Enhance Treatment Outcomes: A Narrative Review.

We face increasing demand for greater access to effective routine mental health services, including telehealth. However, treatment outcomes in routine clinical practice are only about half the size of those reported in controlled trials. Progress feedback, defined as the ongoing monitoring of patients' treatment response with standardized measures, is an evidence-based practice that continues to be under-utilized in routine care. The aim of the current review is to provide a summary of the current evidence base for the use of progress feedback, its mechanisms of action and considerations for successful implementation. We reviewed ten available meta-analyses, which report small to medium overall effect sizes. The results suggest that adding feedback to a wide range of psychological and psychiatric interventions (ranging from primary care to hospitalization and crisis care) tends to enhance the effectiveness of these interventions. The strongest evidence is for patients with common mental health problems compared to those with very severe disorders. Effect sizes for not-on-track cases, a subgroup of cases that are not progressing well, are found to be somewhat stronger, especially when clinical support tools are added to the feedback. Systematic reviews and recent studies suggest potential mechanisms of action for progress feedback include focusing the clinician's attention, altering clinician expectations, providing new information, and enhancing patient-centered communication. Promising approaches to strengthen progress feedback interventions include advanced systems with signaling technology, clinical problem-solving tools, and a broader spectrum of outcome and progress measures. An overview of methodological and implementation challenges is provided, as well as suggestions for addressing these issues in future studies. We conclude that while feedback has modest effects, it is a small and affordable intervention that can potentially improve outcomes in psychological interventions. Further research into mechanisms of action and effective implementation strategies is needed.

An examination of therapists' professional characteristics as moderators of the effect of feedback on psychological treatment outcomes.

Feedback-informed treatment (FIT) has been shown to reduce the gap between more and less effective therapists. This study aimed to examine therapists' professional characteristics as potential moderators of the effect of feedback on treatment outcomes.The IAPT-FIT Trial was a clinical trial where therapists were randomly assigned to a FIT group or a usual care control group. Treatment response was monitored using measures of depression (PHQ-9), anxiety (GAD-7) and functional impairment (WSAS). In a secondary analysis of this trial (n = 1,835 patients; t = 67 therapists), we used multilevel modelling to examine interactions between therapists' professional characteristics (e.g., attitude towards and self-efficacy regarding feedback utilization, decision-making style, job satisfaction, burnout, difficulties in practice, coping styles, caseload size) with random allocation (FIT vs. controls) to identify moderators of the effects of feedback.Between 9.6% and 10.8% of variability in treatment outcomes was attributable to therapist effects. Therapist-level caseload sizes and external feedback propensity (EFP) moderated the effect of feedback on depression outcomes. No statistically significant main effects were found for any of the included therapist characteristics.FIT reduced variability in outcomes between therapists and was particularly effective for therapists with high EFP and larger caseloads.

Protocol for a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of a multicomponent sustainable return to work IGLOo intervention.

BACKGROUND: Long-term sickness costs businesses in the United Kingdom (UK) approximately £7 billion per annum. Most long-term sickness absences are attributed to common mental health conditions, which are also highly prevalent in people with acute or musculoskeletal health conditions. This study will pilot the IGLOo (Individual, Group, Leaders, Organisation, overarching context) intervention which aims to support workers in returning to and remaining in work following long-term sickness absence. The potential impact of the intervention is a timely return to work (main trial primary outcome) and prevention of a further episode of long-term sick leave. The intervention will be piloted in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to examine the feasibility of the intervention (pilot trial primary outcome) and to inform a fully powered definitive trial to evaluate sustainable return to work (RTW) in people with primary or secondary mental ill-health who go on long-term sick leave. METHODS AND DESIGN: A two-arm feasibility randomised controlled trial (with a 30-month study period including 12-month follow-up) of the IGLOo intervention will be conducted in large organisations (≥ 600 workers) from the Yorkshire and Humberside regions, in the UK. Eight consenting organisations will be recruited and randomised to the intervention or control arms of the study (1:1 ratio), with a minimum recruitment target of 13 workers eligible to participate from each. Organisations assigned to the control group will continue with their usual practice. Feasibility data will include data collected on recruitment, retention and attrition of participants; completion of research outcome measures; and intervention compliance. Measurements of mental health, RTW, work outcomes, quality-of-life, workplace support and communication and other demographic data will be taken at baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months in all participants. Qualitative interviews and survey data with all participants will explore the experiences of participants, acceptability of the intervention components and evaluation measures. Exploratory economic evaluation will be conducted to further inform a definitive trial. DISCUSSION: The findings from this pilot study will help to inform the development of a definitive cluster RCT designed to examine the efficacy of this intervention on health and work-related outcomes in UK workers on long-term sick leave. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN11788559 (prospectively registered, date registered 6 October 2022).

First impressions matter: The influence of initial assessments on psychological treatment initiation and subsequent dropout.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated if patients' experience of an initial assessment may be associated with outcome expectations, and with subsequent treatment attendance. METHOD: The sample comprised n = 6051 patients with depression/anxiety disorders, nested within k = 148 assessing therapists. Multilevel modelling (MLM) was used to examine therapist effects on treatment initiation and subsequent dropout, adjusting for patient-level characteristics. We tested associations between early outcome expectancy measured at an initial assessment with attendance at a first therapy session, and with dropout after initiation. Variability in mean expectancy ratings in the caseloads of assessing therapists was examined using the intracluster correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: Therapist effects partly explained the variance in treatment initiation and dropout. Pre-treatment outcome expectations significantly predicted treatment initiation but not dropout for the subgroup of patients who started treatment. Approximately 16% of variability in mean expectancy ratings was explained by therapist effects (ICC = 0.159) after controlling for patient-level covariates. CONCLUSIONS: Patients assessed by some therapists are more likely to have higher outcome expectations, which influences their decision to initiate treatment thereafter. Once patients start therapy, early expectancy measured at assessment no longer influences their attendance, but the "first impression" from an initial assessment does influence their subsequent likelihood of dropout.

The efficacy of individual humanistic-experiential therapies for the treatment of depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: Conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of individual humanistic-experiential therapies (HEPs) for depression. METHOD: Database searches (Scopus, Medline, and PsycINFO) identified RCTs comparing any HEP intervention with a treatment-as-usual (TAU) control or active alternative intervention for the treatment of depression. Included studies were assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 tool and narratively synthesized. Post-treatment and follow-up effect sizes were aggregated using random-effects meta-analysis and moderators of treatment effect were explored (PROSPERO: CRD42021240485). RESULTS: Seventeen RCTs, synthesized across four meta-analyzes, indicated HEP depression outcomes were significantly better than TAU controls at post-treatment (g = 0.41, 95% CI [0.18, 0.65], n = 735), but not significantly different at follow-up (g = 0.14, 95% CI [-0.30, 0.58], n = 631). HEP depression outcomes were comparable to active treatments at post-treatment (g = -0.09, 95% CI [-0.26, 0.08], n = 2131), but significantly favored non-HEP alternative interventions at follow-up (g = -0.21, 95% CI [-0.35, -0.07], n = 1196). CONCLUSION: Relative to usual care, HEPs are effective in the short-term and comparable to non-HEP alternative interventions at post-treatment, but not at follow-up. However, imprecision, inconsistency, and risk of bias concerns were identified as limitations of the evidence included. Future large-scale trials of HEPs with equipoise between comparator conditions are required.

An investigation of treatment return after psychological therapy for depression and anxiety.

BACKGROUND: Some patients return for further psychological treatment in routine services, although it is unclear how common this is, as scarce research is available on this topic. AIMS: To estimate the treatment return rate and describe the clinical characteristics of patients who return for anxiety and depression treatment. METHOD: A large dataset (N=21,029) of routinely collected clinical data (2010-2015) from an English psychological therapy service was analysed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: The return rate for at least one additional treatment episode within 1-5 years was 13.7%. Furthermore, 14.5% of the total sessions provided by the service were delivered to treatment-returning patients. Of those who returned, 58.0% continued to show clinically significant depression and/or anxiety symptoms at the end of their first treatment, while 32.0% had experienced a demonstrable relapse before their second treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This study estimates that approximately one in seven patients return to the same service for additional psychological treatment within 1-5 years. Multiple factors may influence the need for additional treatment, and this may have a major impact on service activity. Future research needs to further explore and better determine the characteristics of treatment returners, prioritise enhancement of first treatment recovery, and evaluate relapse prevention interventions.

Cognitive change before sudden gains in cognitive behavioural therapy for panic disorder.

BACKGROUND: Sudden gains occur in a range of disorders and treatments and are of clinical and theoretical significance if they can shed light on therapeutic change processes. This study investigated the relationship between sudden gains in panic symptoms and preceding cognitive change during cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for panic disorder. METHOD: Participants with panic disorder completed in session measures of panic symptoms and catastrophic cognitions. Independent samples t-tests were used to compare the post-treatment score of those who met criteria for one or more sudden gain during treatment with those who did not, and to compare within-session cognitive change between pre-sudden gain sessions and the previous (control) session. RESULTS: Twenty-two (42%) of 53 participants experienced a sudden gain during treatment. Participants demonstrating a sudden gain showed more improvement in panic symptoms from pre- to post-treatment than those without a sudden gain. The within-session cognitive change score in the pre-gain session was significantly greater than in the control session. CONCLUSIONS: Sudden gains occurred in individual CBT for panic disorder and within-session cognitive change was associated with sudden gains. This is consistent with the cognitive model of panic disorder and highlights how sudden gains can help to identify key change processes.

The Importance of Conducting Practice-oriented Research with Underserved Populations.

There has been a growing emphasis on dissemination of empirically supported treatments. Dissemination, however, should not be restricted to treatment. It can and, in the spirit of the scientific-practitioner model, should also involve research. Because it focuses on the investigation of clinical routine as it takes place in local settings and because it can involve the collaboration of several stakeholders, practice-oriented research (POR) can be viewed as an optimal research method to be disseminated. POR has the potential of addressing particularly relevant gaps of knowledge and action when implemented in regions of the world that have limited resources for or experiences with empirical research, and/or in clinical settings that are serving clinical populations who are not typically receiving optimal mental care services - specifically, individuals in rural and inner cities that have limited economic and social resources. The establishment and maintenance of POR in such regions and/or settings, however, come with specific obstacles and challenges. Integrating the experiences acquired from research conducted in various continents (Africa, Europe, Latin America, and North America), the goal of this paper is to describe some of these challenges, strategies that have been implemented to address them, as well as new possible directions to facilitate the creation and growth of POR. It also describes how these challenges and ways to deal with them can provide helpful lessons for already existing POR infrastructures.

Using machine learning algorithms to predict the effects of change processes in psychotherapy: Toward process-level treatment personalization.

This study aimed to develop and test algorithms to determine the individual relevance of two psychotherapeutic change processes (i.e., mastery and clarification) for outcome prediction. We measured process and outcome variables in a naturalistic outpatient sample treated with an integrative treatment for a variety of diagnoses (n = 608) during the first 10 sessions. We estimated individual within-patient effects of each therapist-evaluated process of change on patient-evaluated subsequent outcomes on a session-by-session basis. Using patients' baseline characteristics, we trained machine learning algorithms on a randomly selected subsample (n = 407) to predict the effects of patients' process variables on outcome. We subsequently tested the predictive capacity of the best algorithm for each process on a holdout subsample (n = 201). We found significant within-patient effects of therapist perceived mastery and clarification on subsequent outcome. In the holdout subsample, the best-performing algorithms resulted in significant but small-to-medium correlations between the predicted and observed relevance of therapist perceived mastery (r = .18) and clarification (r = .16). Using the algorithms to create criteria for individual recommendations, in the holdout sample, we identified patients for whom mastery (14%) or clarification (18%) were indicated. In the mastery-indicated group, a greater focus on mastery was moderately associated with better outcome (r = .33, d = .70), while in the clarification-indicated group, the focus was not related to outcome (r = -.05, d = .10). Results support the feasibility of performing individual predictions regarding mastery process relevance that can be useful for therapist feedback and treatment recommendations. However, results will need to be replicated with prospective experimental designs. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Cognitive-behavioural versus cognitive-analytic guided self-help for mild-to-moderate anxiety: a pragmatic, randomised patient preference trial.

BACKGROUND: Guided self-help (GSH) for anxiety is widely implemented in primary care services because of service efficiency gains, but there is also evidence of poor acceptability, low effectiveness and relapse. AIMS: The aim was to compare preferences for, acceptability and efficacy of cognitive-behavioural guided self-help (CBT-GSH) versus cognitive-analytic guided self-help (CAT-GSH). METHOD: This was a pragmatic, randomised, patient preference trial (Clinical trials identifier: NCT03730532). The Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) was the primary outcome at 8- and 24-week follow-up. Interventions were delivered competently on the telephone via structured workbooks over 6-8 (30-35 min) sessions by trained practitioners. RESULTS: A total of 271 eligible participants were included, of whom 19 (7%) accepted being randomised and 252 (93%) chose their treatment. In the preference cohort, 181 (72%) chose CAT-GSH and 71 (28%) preferred CBT-GSH. BAI outcomes in the preference and randomised cohorts did not differ at 8 weeks (-0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) -4.52 to 2.92) or 24 weeks (0.85, 95% CI -2.87 to 4.57). After controlling for allocation method and baseline covariates, there were no differences between CAT-GSH and CBT-GSH at 8 weeks (F(1, 263) = 0.22, P = 0.639) or at 24 weeks (F(1, 263) = 0.22, P = 0.639). Mean BAI change from baseline was a reduction of 9.28 for CAT-GSH and 9.78 for CBT-GSH at 8 weeks and 12.90 for CAT-GSH and 12.43 for CBT-GSH at 24 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Patients accessing routine primary care talking treatments prefer to choose the intervention they receive. CAT-GSH expands the treatment offer in primary care for patients with anxiety seeking a brief but analytically informed GSH solution.

Is clinical decision making in stepped-care psychological services influenced by heuristics and biases?

BACKGROUND: The manner in which heuristics and biases influence clinical decision-making has not been fully investigated and the methods previously used have been rudimentary. AIMS: Two studies were conducted to design and test a trial-based methodology to assess the influence of heuristics and biases; specifically, with a focus on how practitioners make decisions about suitability for therapy, treatment fidelity and treatment continuation in psychological services. METHOD: Study 1 (N=12) used a qualitative design to develop two clinical vignette-based tasks that had the aim of triggering heuristics and biases during clinical decision making. Study 2 (N=133) then used a randomized crossover experimental design and involved psychological wellbeing practitioners (PWPs) working in the Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) programme in England. Vignettes evoked heuristics (anchoring and halo effects) and biased responses away from normative decisions. Participants completed validated measures of decision-making style. The two decision-making tasks from the vignettes yielded a clinical decision score (CDS; higher scores being more consistent with normative/unbiased decisions). RESULTS: Experimental manipulations used to evoke heuristics did not significantly bias CDS. Decision-making style was not consistently associated with CDS. Clinical decisions were generally normative, although with some variability. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical decision-making can be 'noisy' (i.e. variable across practitioners and occasions), but there was little evidence that this variability was systematically influenced by anchoring and halo effects in a stepped-care context.

Efficacy of personalized psychological interventions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of different approaches to personalization in psychological therapy. METHOD: This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that compared the mental health outcomes of personalized treatment with standardized treatment and other control groups. Eligible studies were identified through three databases (Scopus, APA PsycInfo, and Web of Science). We conducted a narrative synthesis and random effects meta-analysis of available outcomes date, including subgroup analyses to investigate sources of effect size heterogeneity. The review protocol was preregistered in the Open Science Framework. RESULTS: Seventeen studies (N = 7,617) met inclusion criteria for the review, nine of which (N = 5,134) provided sufficient data for inclusion in meta-analysis. Eight studies were classed as having high risk of bias, eight had moderate risk, and one had low risk. There was no significant evidence of publication bias. A statistically significant effect size was found in favor of personalized treatment relative to standardized treatment (d = 0.22, 95% CI [0.05, 0.39], p = .011). When studies with a high risk of bias were removed, this effect size was smaller but remained statistically significant (d = 0.14, 95% CI [0.08, 0.20], p < .001). CONCLUSION: Current evidence indicates that personalization is an effective strategy to improve outcomes from psychological therapy, and the seemingly small effect size advantage of personalization could have an important impact at a clinical population level. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Routine Outcome Monitoring (ROM) and Feedback: Research Review and Recommendations.

OBJECTIVE: To provide a research review of the components and outcomes of routine outcome monitoring (ROM) and recommendations for research and therapeutic practice. METHOD: A narrative review of the three phases of ROM - data collection, feeding back data, and adapting therapy - and an overview of patient outcomes from 11 meta-analytic studies. RESULTS: Patients support ROM when its purpose is clear and integrated within therapy. Greater frequency of data collection is more important for shorter-term therapies, and use of graphs, greater specificity of feedback, and alerts are helpful. Overall effects on patient outcomes are statistically significant (g ≈ 0.15) and increase when clinical support tools (CSTs) are used for not-on-track cases (g ≈ 0.36-0.53). Effects are additive to standard effects of psychological therapies. Organizational, personnel, and resource issues remain the greatest obstacles to the successful adoption of ROM. CONCLUSION: ROM offers a low-cost method for enhancing patient outcomes, on average resulting in an ≈ 8% advantage (success rate difference; SRD) over standard care. CSTs are particularly effective for not-on-track patients (SRD between ≈ 20% and 29%), but ROM does not work for all patients and successful implementation is a major challenge, along with securing appropriate cultural adaptations.

Long-term psychotherapy in tertiary care: A practice-based benchmarking study.

OBJECTIVES: The literature regarding the effectiveness of long-term psychological interventions delivered in tertiary care is scarce. This study sought to quantify and evaluate outcomes delivered in a UK tertiary care psychotherapy service against equivalent service benchmarks. DESIGN: A retrospective analysis of outcomes on the Outcome Questionnaire-45 (OQ-45) over a 10-year period in a tertiary care psychotherapy service. The modalities evaluated were cognitive-behavioural, cognitive-analytic, and psychoanalytic psychotherapies. METHODS: Effectiveness was calculated at the service level and for each modality using pre-post-effect sizes and recovery rates. Benchmarking included a random-effects meta-analysis. Trajectories of change for each modality were examined using growth curve models. RESULTS: Baseline distress on the OQ-45 was higher than comparative norms (M = 102.57, SD = 22.79, N = 364). The average number of sessions was 48.68 (SD = 42.14, range = 5-335). There was a moderate pre-post-treatment effect (d = .46, 95% CI = .37-.55) which was lower than available benchmarks. The modalities differed in duration but were largely equivalent in terms of outcome. The reliable improvement rate was 29.95%, and the recovery rate was 10.16%, and change over time was best explained using a nonlinear (cubic) time trend. CONCLUSIONS: The elevated distress at baseline appears to create the conditions for relatively lengthy interventions and attenuated clinical outcomes. Suggestions are made regarding the clinical role, function, and evaluation of tertiary care psychotherapy services.

Pragmatic randomized controlled trial of the Mind Management Skills for Life Programme as an intervention for occupational burnout in mental healthcare professionals.

BACKGROUND: Occupational burnout is highly prevalent in the mental healthcare workforce and associated with poorer job satisfaction, performance and outcomes. AIMS: To evaluate the effects of the Mind Management Skills for Life Programme on burnout and wellbeing. METHODS: N = 173 mental health nurses were recruited from the English National Health Service during the acute phase of the COVID-19 crisis. Participants were allocated to an immediate intervention or a delayed intervention control group, using a stepped wedge randomized controlled trial design. Measures of burnout (OLBI) and wellbeing (WEMWBS) were completed at four time-points: [1] baseline; [2] after the first group finished the intervention; [3] after the second group finished the intervention; and [4] six-months follow-up. RESULTS: Between-group differences were compared at each time-point using ANCOVA adjusting for baseline severity. Statistically significant effects on burnout (d = 0.60) and wellbeing (d = -0.62) were found at time-point 2, favouring the intervention relative to waitlist control. No significant differences were found at subsequent time-points, indicating that both groups improved and maintained their gains after the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: This intervention led to moderate improvements in burnout and wellbeing, despite the adverse circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic at the time of the study.