Realist synthesis of factors affecting retention of staff in UK adult mental health services.

OBJECTIVES: The shortage of healthcare staff is a global problem. UK mental health services have, on average, a higher turnover of staff than the NHS. Factors affecting retention of this staff group need to be explored in more depth to understand what is working for whom, for what reasons and in what circumstances. This review aims to conduct a realist synthesis to explore evidence from published studies, together with stakeholder involvement to develop programme theories that hypothesise how and why retention occurs in the mental health workforce and identify additional evidence to explore and test these theories thereby highlighting any persistent gaps in understanding. This paper develops programme theories that hypothesise why retention occurs and in what context and tests these theories thereby highlighting any persistent gaps in understanding. METHODS: Realist synthesis was used to develop programme theories for factors affecting retention of UK mental health staff. This involved: (1) stakeholder consultation and literature scoping to develop initial programme theories; (2) structured searches across six databases to identify 85 included relevant literature relating to the programme theories; and (3) analysis and synthesis to build and refine a final programme theory and logic model. RESULTS: Phase I combined findings from 32 stakeholders and 24 publications to develop six initial programme theories. Phases II and III identified and synthesised evidence from 88 publications into three overarching programme theories stemming from organisational culture: interconnectedness of workload and quality of care, investment in staff support and development and involvement of staff and service users in policies and practice. CONCLUSIONS: Organisational culture was found to have a key underpinning effect on retention of mental health staff. This can be modified but staff need to be well supported and feel involved to derive satisfaction from their roles. Manageable workloads and being able to deliver good quality care were also key.

Integrating mental health care into home-based nursing services: A qualitative study utilising normalisation process theory.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To identify barriers and facilitators to implementing community nurses being trained as psychological wellbeing practitioners and integrating this practice into home-based primary care nursing, through key stakeholders' perceptions. BACKGROUND: Current drivers in UK primary care aim to increase access to mental health services and treatment, to achieve parity of esteem between physical and mental health care for patients who are housebound. However, there remains limited evidence on how to successfully implement this. Training community nurses as psychological wellbeing practitioners to offer mental health care alongside their current home-based services is one option. DESIGN: A pluralistic qualitative study. This study followed the COREQ checklist for reporting qualitative research. METHODS: Twenty key stakeholders were purposively recruited and interviewed including twelve health professionals and eight patients. Semi-structured interviews were analysed using a theoretical thematic analysis informed by normalisation process theory concepts of coherence, cognitive participation, collective action and reflexive monitoring, to explore the barriers and facilitators to implementation. RESULTS: Staff and patients reported high coherence and cognitive participation, valuing the integrated roles. Facilitators included the development of clearer referral pathways and increased mental health knowledge in the wider team. However, sustainability and current siloed healthcare systems were identified as barriers to implementation. CONCLUSIONS: A key obstacle to long-term implementation was the practical structures and financial boundaries of siloed healthcare systems, making long-term sustainability unviable. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Community nurses with additional mental health training can integrate these skills in practice and are valued by their team and patients offering holistic care to patients within their home and informal knowledge transfer to the wider team. However, long-term sustainability is required if this is to be adopted routinely. Further evidence is needed to better understand the positive outcomes to patients and potential cost savings.

Person-centred experiential therapy versus cognitive behavioural therapy delivered in the English Improving Access to Psychological Therapies service for the treatment of moderate or severe depression (PRaCTICED): a pragmatic, randomised, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: The UK Government's implementation in 2008 of the Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) initiative in England has hugely increased the availability of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for the treatment of depression and anxiety in primary care. Counselling for depression-a form of person-centred experiential therapy (PCET)-has since been included as an IAPT-approved therapy, but there is no evidence of its efficacy from randomised controlled trials (RCTs), as required for recommendations by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Therefore, we aimed to examine whether PCET is cost effective and non-inferior to CBT in the treatment of moderate and severe depression within the IAPT service. METHODS: This pragmatic, randomised, non-inferiority trial was done in the Sheffield IAPT service in England and recruited participants aged 18 years or older with moderate or severe depression on the Clinical Interview Schedule-Revised. We excluded participants presenting with an organic condition, a previous diagnosis of personality disorder, bipolar disorder, or schizophrenia, drug or alcohol dependency, an elevated clinical risk of suicide, or a long-term physical condition. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1), independently of the research team, and stratified by site with permuted block sizes of two, four, or six, to receive either PCET or CBT by use of a remote, web-based system that revealed therapy after patient details were entered. Those assessing outcomes were masked to treatment allocation. Participants were seen by appropriately trained PCET counsellors and CBT therapists in accordance with the IAPT service delivery model. Depression severity and symptomatology measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) at 6 months post-randomisation was the primary outcome, with the PHQ-9 score at 12 months post-randomisation being a key secondary outcome. These outcomes were analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population, which comprised all randomly assigned patients with complete data, and the per-protocol population, which comprised all participants who did not switch from their randomised treatment and received between four and 20 sessions. Safety was analysed in all randomly assigned patients. The non-inferiority margin was set a priori at 2 PHQ-9 points. Patient safety was monitored throughout the course of therapy, adhering to service risk procedures for monitoring serious adverse events. This trial is registered at the ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN06461651, and is complete. FINDINGS: From Nov 11, 2014, to Aug 3, 2018, 9898 patients were referred to step three treatments in the Sheffield IAPT service for common mental health problems, of whom 761 (7·7%) were referred to the trial. Of these, we recruited and randomly assigned 510 participants to receive either PCET (n=254) or CBT (n=256). In the PCET group, 138 (54%) participants were female and 116 (46%) were male, and 225 (89%) were White, 16 (6%) were non-White, and 13 (5%) had missing ethnicity data. In the CBT group, 155 (61%) participants were female and 101 (39%) were male, and 226 (88%) were White, 17 (7%) were non-White, and 13 (5%) had missing ethnicity data. The 6-month modified intention-to-treat analysis comprised 401 (79%) of the enrolled participants (201 in the PCET group; 200 in the CBT group) and the 12-month modified intention-to-treat analysis comprised 319 participants (167 in the PCET group; 152 in the CBT group). The 6-month per-protocol analysis comprised 298 participants (154 in the PCET group; 144 in the CBT group). At 6 months post-randomisation, PCET was non-inferior to CBT in the intention-to-treat population (mean PHQ-9 score 12·74 [SD 6·54] in the PCET group and 13·25 [6·35] in the CBT group; adjusted mean difference -0·35 [95% CI -1·53 to 0·84]) and in the per-protocol population (12·73 [SD 6·57] in the PCET group and 12·71 [6·33] in the CBT group; 0·27 [95% CI -1·08 to 1·62]). At 12 months post-randomisation, there was a significant adjusted between-group difference in mean PHQ-9 score in favour of CBT (1·73 [95% CI 0·26-3·19]), with a 95% CI exceeding the 2-point non-inferiority margin. There were two deaths, one death by suicide in the PCET group and one due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the CBT group. Both were assessed by the responsible clinician to be unrelated to the trial. In terms of using emergency departments for depression-related events, four people (three in the PCET group; one in the CBT group) made more than a single use and six people (three in the PCET group; three in the CBT group) made a single use. One patient in the PCET group had inpatient treatment for a depression-related event. INTERPRETATION: This trial is the first to examine the two most frequently administered psychological therapies in the IAPT service. The finding of non-inferiority of PCET to CBT at 6 months supports the results from large, routine, non-randomised datasets from the IAPT programme. Given the high demand for psychological therapies and the need for patient choice, our findings suggest the need for continued investment in the training and delivery of PCET for improving short-term outcomes, but suggest that PCET might be inferior to CBT at 12 months. FUNDING: British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy Research Foundation.

Social prescribing for people with complex needs: a realist evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Social Prescribing is increasingly popular, and several evaluations have shown positive results. However, Social Prescribing is an umbrella term that covers many different interventions. We aimed to test, develop and refine a programme theory explaining the underlying mechanisms operating in Social Prescribing to better enhance its effectiveness by allowing it to be targeted to those who will benefit most, when they will benefit most. METHODS: We conducted a realist evaluation of a large Social Prescribing organisation in the North of England. Thirty-five interviews were conducted with stakeholders (clients attending Social Prescribing, Social Prescribing staff and general practice staff). Through an iterative process of analysis, a series of context-mechanism-outcome configurations were developed, refined and retested at a workshop of 15 stakeholders. The initial programme theory was refined, retested and 'applied' to wider theory. RESULTS: Social Prescribing in this organisation was found to be only superficially similar to collaborative care. A complex web of contexts, mechanisms and outcomes for its clients are described. Key elements influencing outcomes described by stakeholders included social isolation and wider determinants of health; poor interagency communication for people with multiple needs. Successful Social Prescribing requires a non-stigmatising environment and person-centred care, and shares many features described by the asset-based theory of Salutogenesis. CONCLUSIONS: The Social Prescribing model studied is holistic and person-centred and as such enables those with a weak sense of coherence to strengthen this, access resistance resources, and move in a health promoting or salutogenic direction.

Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) for the treatment of psychosis: a systematic review.

Background: Psychosis is a public health concern. There is increasing evidence suggesting trauma can play a pivotal role in the development and maintenance of psychosis. Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) is an effective treatment for trauma and could be a vital addition to the treatment of psychosis. Objective: To explore the evidence for EMDR as a treatment for psychosis, focussing on the safety, effectiveness and acceptability of this intervention for this population. Methods: Four databases (Cochrane, EMBASE, MEDLINE PsychINFO), and the Francine Shapiro Library were systematically searched, along with grey literature and reference lists of relevant papers. No date limits were applied as this is an area of emerging evidence. Studies were screened for eligibility based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. The included studies were quality assessed and data was extracted from the individual studies, and synthesized using a narrative synthesis approach. Results: Six studies met the inclusion criteria (1 RCT, 2 Pilot studies, 2 Case series and 1 Case report). Across the studies EMDR was associated with reductions in delusional and negative symptoms, mental health service and medication use. Evidence for reductions in auditory hallucinations and paranoid thinking was mixed. No adverse events were reported, although initial increases in psychotic symptoms were observed in two studies. Average dropout rates across the studies were comparable to other trauma-focused treatments for PTSD. The acceptability of EMDR was not adequately measured or reported. Conclusion: EMDR appears a safe and feasible intervention for people with psychosis. The evidence is currently insufficient to determine the effectiveness and acceptability of the intervention for this population. Larger confirmative trials are required to form more robust conclusions.

Antecedentes: La psicosis es un problema de salud pública. Cada vez hay más evidencia sugiriendo que el trauma puede desempeñar un papel fundamental en el desarrollo y mantenimiento de la psicosis. La desensibilización y reprocesamiento por movimiento ocular (EMDR en su sigla en inglés) es un tratamiento efectivo para el trauma y podría ser una adición vital al tratamiento de la psicosis.Objetivo: explorar el evidencia de EMDR como tratamiento para la psicosis, enfocándose en la seguridad, efectividad y aceptabilidad de esta intervención para esta población.Métodos: Se realizaron búsquedas sistemáticas en cuatro bases de datos (Cochrane, EMBASE, MEDLINE PsychINFO) y la Biblioteca Francine Shapiro, junto con literatura gris y listas de referencias de artículos relevantes. No se aplicaron límites de fecha ya que esta es un área con evidencia emergente. Los estudios se seleccionaron determinando su elegibilidad según los criterios de inclusión y exclusión. Los estudios incluidos fueron evaluados de acuerdo a su calidad y los datos se extrajeron de los estudios individuales y se sintetizaron utilizando un enfoque de síntesis narrativa.Resultados: Seis estudios cumplieron los criterios de inclusión (1 ensayo controlado aleatorio, 2 estudios piloto, 2 series de casos y 1 informe de caso). En todos los estudios, EMDR se asoció con reducciones en los síntomas delirantes y negativos, el servicio de salud mental y el uso de medicamentos. La evidencia de reducciones en las alucinaciones auditivas y el pensamiento paranoico fue mixta. No se informaron eventos adversos, aunque se observaron aumentos iniciales en los síntomas psicóticos en dos estudios. Las tasas promedio de abandono en los estudios fueron comparables a otros tratamientos centrados en el trauma para el TEPT. La aceptabilidad de EMDR no se midió ni informó adecuadamente.Conclusión: EMDR parece una intervención segura y factible para personas con psicosis. La evidencia es actualmente insuficiente para determinar la efectividad y la aceptabilidad de la intervención para esta población. Se requieren ensayos confirmatorios más grandes para formar conclusiones más sólidas.

The feasibility of brief dog-assisted therapy on university students stress levels: the PAwS study.

BACKGROUND: Pet therapy is becoming increasingly popular and is used in a variety of ways from encouraging communication in older adults to improving wellbeing in those with serious mental illness. Increasingly Universities have been offering pet therapy to students in an effort to reduce stress. However, little evidence currently exists to support the effectiveness of reducing measurable stress levels after a standalone drop-in unstructured session. The University of Sheffield's Counselling Service works in partnership with Guide Dogs for the Blind to give students access to calm, well-trained animals for informal group stress relief. AIMS: To assess the feasibility of implementing and evaluating unstructured group interventions with a Guide Dog in training within the university student population. METHODS: One hundred and thirty-one students who attended pet therapy at the University Counselling Service were recruited on a voluntary basis to take part in the research. Stress, measured on the state trait anxiety inventory, and blood pressure were taken before and after a 15-min intervention. RESULTS: All measures showed a statistically significant reduction immediately after the intervention. CONCLUSION: Short interactions with a Guide Dog in training appear to reduce stress in University students. A controlled study is required to investigate further.

The effect of comorbid depression on the use of unscheduled hospital care by people with a long term condition: A retrospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of long-term conditions (LTCs) and multiple-morbidity is increasing. Depression prevalence increases with the number of LTCs. Self-management of LTCs improves outcomes, but depression impacts on self-management. Unscheduled hospital care may be a proxy for failure of planned care to support successful self-management. METHODS: Retrospective observational study based on routine NHS datasets covering 19 LTCs. Prevalence of LTCs and depression was identified in all primary care registered adults in one English city (n = 469,368). Chi squared was used for hypothesis testing, and logistic regression to determine the influence of depression and LTC(s) on the use of unscheduled hospital care. RESULTS: At least one LTC was identified in 220,010 (46.9%) adults; 75,107 (16.0%) had depression; and 38,232 (8.1%) had LTC plus comorbid depression. A significantly greater proportion of individuals with LTC and comorbid depression had ≥ 1 unscheduled event over 12 months (31.5%) compared to individuals with LTC(s) only (24.0%), X2(1) = 883.860, p < .001. The logistic regression model explained 4.4% of the variation in unscheduled care use. Individuals with depression plus ≥ 1 LTC were 1.59 times more likely to use unscheduled hospital care than individuals with LTC only (p < .001), after controlling for deprivation, age and number of LTCs. LIMITATIONS: Cross-sectional data precluded identification of the direction of influence between LTCs and depression. Only 19 major LTCs were studied, so overall LTC prevalence will be under-represented, and other significant predictors may be omitted. CONCLUSION: In people with a LTC, comorbidity with depression increases use of unscheduled hospital care.

What are the barriers and facilitators to implementing Collaborative Care for depression? A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Collaborative Care is an evidence-based approach to the management of depression within primary care services recommended within NICE Guidance. However, uptake within the UK has been limited. This review aims to investigate the barriers and facilitators to implementing Collaborative Care. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was undertaken to uncover what barriers and facilitators have been reported by previous research into Collaborative Care for depression in primary care. RESULTS: The review identified barriers and facilitators to successful implementation of Collaborative Care for depression in 18 studies across a range of settings. A framework analysis was applied using the Collaborative Care definition. The most commonly reported barriers related to the multi-professional approach, such as staff and organisational attitudes to integration, and poor inter-professional communication. Facilitators to successful implementation particularly focussed on improving inter-professional communication through standardised care pathways and case managers with clear role boundaries and key underpinning personal qualities. LIMITATIONS: Not all papers were independent title and abstract screened by multiple reviewers thus limiting the reliability of the selected studies. There are many different frameworks for assessing the quality of qualitative research and little consensus as to which is most appropriate in what circumstances. The use of a quality threshold led to the exclusion of six papers that could have included further information on barriers and facilitators. CONCLUSIONS: Although the evidence base for Collaborative Care is strong, and the population within primary care with depression is large, the preferred way to implement the approach has not been identified.

A pragmatic randomised controlled trial assessing the non-inferiority of counselling for depression versus cognitive-behaviour therapy for patients in primary care meeting a diagnosis of moderate or severe depression (PRaCTICED): Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: NICE guidelines state cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is a front-line psychological treatment for people presenting with depression in primary care. Counselling for Depression (CfD), a form of Person-Centred Experiential therapy, is also offered within Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) services for moderate depression but its effectiveness for severe depression has not been investigated. A full-scale randomised controlled trial to determine the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of CfD is required. METHODS: PRaCTICED is a two-arm, parallel group, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial comparing CfD against CBT. It is embedded within the local IAPT service using a stepped care service delivery model where CBT and CfD are routinely offered at step 3. Trial inclusion criteria comprise patients aged 18 years or over, wishing to work on their depression, judged to require a step 3 intervention, and meeting an ICD-10 diagnosis of moderate or severe depression. Patients are randomised using a centralised, web-based system to CfD or CBT with each treatment being delivered up to a maximum 20 sessions. Both interventions are manualised with treatment fidelity tested via supervision and random sampling of sessions using adherence/competency scales. The primary outcome measure is the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 collected at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Secondary outcome measures tap depression, generic psychological distress, anxiety, functioning and quality of life. Cost-effectiveness is determined by a patient service receipt questionnaire. Exit interviews are conducted with patients by research assessors blind to treatment allocation. The trial requires 500 patients (250 per arm) to test the non-inferiority hypothesis of -2 PHQ-9 points at the one-sided, 2.5% significance level with 90% power, assuming no underlying difference and a standard deviation of 6.9. The primary analysis will be undertaken on all patients randomised (intent to treat) alongside per-protocol and complier-average causal effect analyses as recommended by the extension to the CONSORT statement for non-inferiority trials. DISCUSSION: This large-scale trial utilises routinely collected outcome data as well as specific trial data to provide evidence of the comparative efficacy and cost-effectiveness of Counselling for Depression compared with Cognitive Behaviour Therapy as delivered within the UK government's Improving Access to Psychological Therapies initiative. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Controlled Trials ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN06461651 . Registered on 14 September 2014.