scholarly journals Protocol investigating the clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of cognitive–behavioural therapy delivered remotely for unscheduled care users with health anxiety: randomised controlled trial

BJPsych Open ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shireen Patel ◽  
Sam Malins ◽  
Boliang Guo ◽  
Marilyn James ◽  
Joe Kai ◽  
...  

BackgroundHealth anxiety and medically unexplained symptoms cost the National Health Service (NHS) an estimated £3 billion per year in unnecessary costs with little evidence of patient benefit. Effective treatment is rarely taken up due to issues such as stigma or previous negative experiences with mental health services. An approach to overcome this might be to offer remotely delivered psychological therapy, which can be just as effective as face-to-face therapy and may be more accessible and suitable.AimsTo investigate the clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of remotely delivered cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) to people with high health anxiety repeatedly accessing unscheduled care (trial registration: NCT02298036).MethodA multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) will be undertaken in primary and secondary care providers of unscheduled care across the East Midlands. One hundred and forty-four eligible participants will be equally randomised to receive either remote CBT (6–12 sessions) or treatment as usual (TAU). Two doctoral research studies will investigate the barriers and facilitators to delivering the intervention and the factors contributing to the optimisation of therapeutic outcome.ResultsThis trial will be the first to test the clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of remotely delivered CBT for the treatment of high health anxiety.ConclusionsThe findings will enable an understanding as to how this intervention might fit into a wider care pathway to enhance patient experience of care.

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. e025031 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barry D Wright ◽  
Cindy Cooper ◽  
Alexander J Scott ◽  
Lucy Tindall ◽  
Shehzad Ali ◽  
...  

IntroductionSpecific phobias (intense, enduring fears of an object or situation that lead to avoidance and severe distress) are highly prevalent among children and young people. Cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) is a well-established, effective intervention, but it can be time consuming and costly because it is routinely delivered over multiple sessions during several months. Alternative methods of treating severe and debilitating phobias in children are needed, like one-session treatment (OST), to reduce time and cost, and to prevent therapeutic drift and help children recover quickly. Our study explores whether (1) outcomes with OST are ‘no worse’ than outcomes with multisession CBT, (2) OST is acceptable to children, their parents and the practitioners who use it and (3) OST offers good value for money to the National Health Service (NHS) and to society.MethodA pragmatic, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial will compare OST with multisession CBT-based therapy on their clinical and cost-effectiveness. The primary clinical outcome is a standardised behavioural task of approaching the feared stimulus at 6 months postrandomisation. The outcomes for the within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis are quality-adjusted life years based on EQ-5D-Y, and individual-level costs based of the intervention and use of health and social service care. A nested qualitative evaluation will explore children’s, parents’ and practitioners’ perceptions and experiences of OST. A total of 286 children, 7–16 years old, with DSM-IV diagnoses of specific phobia will be recruited via gatekeepers in the NHS, schools and voluntary youth services, and via public adverts.Ethics and disseminationThe trial received ethical approval from North East and York Research Ethics Committee (Reference: 17/NE/0012). Dissemination plans include publications in peer-reviewed journals, presentations in relevant research conferences, local research symposia and seminars for children and their families, and for professionals and service managers.Trial registration numberISRCTN19883421;Pre-results.


2014 ◽  
Vol 204 (3) ◽  
pp. 222-233 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda Horrell ◽  
Kimberley A. Goldsmith ◽  
André T. Tylee ◽  
Ulrike H. Schmidt ◽  
Caroline L. Murphy ◽  
...  

BackgroundDespite its high prevalence, help-seeking for depression is low.AimsTo assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of 1-day cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) self-confidence workshops in reducing depression. Anxiety, self-esteem, prognostic indicators as well as access were also assessed.MethodAn open randomised controlled trial (RCT) waiting list control design with 12-week follow-up was used (trial registration: ISRCTN26634837). A total of 459 adult participants with depression (Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) scores of 14) self-referred and 382 participants (83%) were followed up.ResultsAt follow-up, experimental and control participants differed significantly on the BDI, with an effect size of 0.55. Anxiety and self-esteem also differed. Of those who participated, 25% were GP non-consulters and 32% were from Black and minority ethnic groups. Women benefited more than men on depression scores. The intervention has a 90% chance of being considered cost-effective if a depression-free day is valued at £14.ConclusionsSelf-confidence workshops appear promising in terms of clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and access by difficult-to-engage groups.


2010 ◽  
Vol 197 (4) ◽  
pp. 297-304 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra Hollinghurst ◽  
Tim J. Peters ◽  
Surinder Kaur ◽  
Nicola Wiles ◽  
Glyn Lewisand ◽  
...  

BackgroundTherapist-delivered online cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) has been found to be effective for depression in primary care.AimsTo determine the cost-effectiveness of online CBT compared with usual care.MethodEconomic evaluation at 8 months alongside a randomised controlled trial. Cost to the National Health Service (NHS), personal costs, and the value of lost productivity, each compared with outcomes based on the Beck Depression Inventory and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Incremental analysis indicated the NHS cost per QALY gain.ResultsOnline CBT was more expensive than usual care, although the outcomes for the CBT group were better. Cost per QALY gain based on complete case data was £17 173, and £10 083 when missing data were imputed.ConclusionsOnline CBT delivered by a therapist in real time is likely to be cost-effective compared with usual care if society is willing to pay at least £20 000 per QALY; it could be a useful alternative to face-to-face CBT.


2014 ◽  
Vol 205 (4) ◽  
pp. 307-314 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik Hedman ◽  
Erland Axelsson ◽  
Anders Görling ◽  
Carina Ritzman ◽  
Markus Ronnheden ◽  
...  

BackgroundExposure-based cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) delivered via the internet has been shown to be effective for severe health anxiety (hypochondriasis) but has not been compared with an active, effective and credible psychological treatment, such as behavioural stress management (BSM).AimsTo investigate two internet-delivered treatments – exposure-based CBTv.BSM – for severe health anxiety in a randomised controlled trial (trial registration: NCT01673035).MethodParticipants (n= 158) with a principal diagnosis of severe health anxiety were allocated to 12 weeks of exposure-based CBT (n= 79) or BSM (n= 79) delivered via the internet. The Health Anxiety Inventory (HAI) was the primary outcome.ResultsInternet-delivered exposure-based CBT led to a significantly greater improvement on the HAI compared with BSM. However, both treatment groups made large improvements on the HAI (pre-to-post-treatment Cohen'sd: exposure-based CBT, 1.78; BSM, 1.22).ConclusionsExposure-based CBT delivered via the internet is an efficacious treatment for severe health anxiety.Declarations of interestNone.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e050661
Author(s):  
Håvard Kallestad ◽  
Simen Saksvik ◽  
Øystein Vedaa ◽  
Knut Langsrud ◽  
Gunnar Morken ◽  
...  

IntroductionInsomnia is highly prevalent in outpatients receiving treatment for mental disorders. Cognitive–behavioural therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) is a recommended first-line intervention. However, access is limited and most patients with insomnia who are receiving mental healthcare services are treated using medication. This multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) examines additional benefits of a digital adaptation of CBT-I (dCBT-I), compared with an online control intervention of patient education about insomnia (PE), in individuals referred to secondary mental health clinics.Methods and analysisA parallel group, superiority RCT with a target sample of 800 participants recruited from treatment waiting lists at Norwegian psychiatric services. Individuals awaiting treatment will receive an invitation to the RCT, with potential participants undertaking online screening and consent procedures. Eligible outpatients will be randomised to dCBT-I or PE in a 1:1 ratio. Assessments will be performed at baseline, 9 weeks after completion of baseline assessments (post-intervention assessment), 33 weeks after baseline (6 months after the post-intervention assessment) and 61 weeks after baseline (12 months after the post-intervention assessment). The primary outcome is between-group difference in insomnia severity 9 weeks after baseline. Secondary outcomes include between-group differences in levels of psychopathology, and measures of health and functioning 9 weeks after baseline. Additionally, we will test between-group differences at 6-month and 12-month follow-up, and examine any negative effects of the intervention, any changes in mental health resource use, and/or in functioning and prescription of medications across the duration of the study. Other exploratory analyses are planned.Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol has been approved by the Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics in Norway (Ref: 125068). Findings from the RCT will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations, and advocacy and stakeholder groups. Exploratory analyses, including potential mediators and moderators, will be reported separately from main outcomes.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04621643); Pre-results.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document