It’s what’s under the hood that counts: comparing therapeutic outcomes when using Australian versus UK-produced clinical materials in an Australian mental health program
Anthony Venning
A D , Tassia K. Oswald A , Mary Barnes B , Fiona Glover A , Sharon Lawn A , Leva Azadi C , Nicci Tepper C and Paula Redpath A
A Discipline of Behavioural Health, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia. Email: tassia.oswald@flinders.edu.au; fiona.glover@flinders.edu.au; sharon.lawn@flinders.edu.au; paula.redpath@flinders.edu.au
B Flinders Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia. Email: mary.barnes@flinders.edu.au
C Remedy HealthCare Group, 11 Little Lonsdale Street, Melbourne, Vic., Australia. Email: LAzadi@remedyhealthcare.com.au; NTepper@remedyhealthcare.com.au
D Corresponding author. Email: anthony.venning@flinders.edu.au
Australian Health Review 45(5) 606-612 https://doi.org/10.1071/AH20307
Submitted: 28 October 2020 Accepted: 1 February 2021 Published: 24 June 2021
Abstract
Objective MindStep™ is an Australian low-intensity cognitive behaviour therapy (LICBT) program for individuals with mild-to-moderate symptoms of anxiety and depression. UK-produced LICBT guided self-help (GSH) materials were originally used in the MindStep™ program. In 2017, Australian LICBT GSH materials were developed to better suit Australian users. This study explored whether the Australian-produced materials continued to achieve the benchmark recovery rates established in the UK and maintained in recent Australian studies.
Methods Binomial logistic regression was conducted using retrospective client data, including the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and the Generalised Anxiety Disorder 7-item scale, between 2016 and 2019.
Results During time periods in which the Australian-produced materials were used, equivalent rates of reliable recovery and improvement were achieved compared with time periods in which the UK-produced materials were used. Australian-trained LICBT coaches, using Australian-produced LICBT GSH materials, achieve client recovery rates of up to 60%, reliable improvement rates of 58% and reliable recovery rates of 46% (with the probability of recovery increasing with client age).
Conclusions These findings are particularly pertinent with COVID-19 changing the landscape of mental health service delivery, requiring greater flexibility in the use of teleservices to ensure access to effective mental health care for populations that may already experience problems with isolation, access and service engagement.
What is known about the topic? LICBT is an acceptable, feasible and effective treatment approach for people experiencing mild-to-moderate anxiety and depression in Australia. LICBT GSH materials used with clients in Australia originated from the UK. However, according to guidelines, LICBT GSH materials should be contextualised to suit the audience they are being used with.
What does this paper add? This paper demonstrates that LICBT GSH materials tailored to an Australian context can be used in place of UK-produced materials because they yield equivalent and consistent therapeutic outcomes. Although contextualising the LICBT GSH materials for health services users was important, it is likely that the evidence-based cognitive behaviour therapy techniques sitting ‘under the hood’ of these materials are most important to ensure successful therapeutic outcomes.
What are the implications for practitioners? As we face unprecedented challenges following 2020, the physical, social, psychological and economic impacts of life-changing events must not inhibit access to treatments for common mental health conditions. It is anticipated that more non-traditional, alternative providers of mental health services will be needed to scale-up and respond to increasing demand. This paper shows that the provision of telephone-based LICBT in Australia, by trained coaches using Australian-produced GSH materials, is an evidenced-based support pathway that can reduce the access gap to treatments.
Keywords: clinical product development, coaching, low-intensity cognitive behaviour therapy (LICBT), mental health, self-guided, tele-mental health, evidenced-based treatment approach, clinical services, primary health care, clinical pathways.
References
[1] Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Australia’s health 2018: in brief. 2018. Available at: https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/australias-health/australias-health-2018-in-brief/contents/about[2] Lawn S, Huang N, Zabeen S, Smith D, Battersby M, Redpath P, et al Outcomes of telephone-delivered low-intensity cognitive behaviour therapy (LiCBT) to community dwelling Australians with a recent hospital admission due to depression or anxiety: MindStep™. BMC Psychiatry 2019; 19 2
| Outcomes of telephone-delivered low-intensity cognitive behaviour therapy (LiCBT) to community dwelling Australians with a recent hospital admission due to depression or anxiety: MindStep™.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 30606169PubMed |
[3] National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Improving access to psychological therapies (IAPT). 2020. Available at: https://www.nice.org.uk/about/what-we-do/our-programmes/nice-advice/iapt
[4] Wilkinson M, Venning A, Redpath P, Ly M, Brown S, Battersby M. Can low intensity cognitive behavioural therapy for non-cardiac chest pain presentations to an emergency department be efficacious? A pilot study. Aust Psychol 2019; 54 494–501.
[5] Baguley C, Farrand P, Hope R, Leibowitz J, Lovell K, Lucock M, et al. Good practice guidance on the use of self-help materials within IAPT services. Technical report. 2010. Available at: http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/id/eprint/9017/
[6] Clark DM, Layard R, Smithies R, Richards DA, Suckling R, Wright B. Improving access to psychological therapy: initial evaluation of two UK demonstration sites. Behav Res Ther 2009; 47 910–20.
| Improving access to psychological therapy: initial evaluation of two UK demonstration sites.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 19647230PubMed |
[7] Gyani A, Shafran R, Layard R, Clark DM. Enhancing recovery rates: lessons from year one of IAPT. Behav Res Ther 2013; 51 597–606.
| Enhancing recovery rates: lessons from year one of IAPT.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 23872702PubMed |
[8] Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med 2001; 16 606–13.
| The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 11556941PubMed |
[9] National Health Service. The IAPT data handbook: guidance on recording and monitoring outcomes to support local evidence-based practice. Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT); 2011.
[10] Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JBW, Löwe B. A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7. Arch Intern Med 2006; 166 1092–7.
| A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 16717171PubMed |
[11] Richards DA, Borglin G. Implementation of psychological therapies for anxiety and depression in routine practice: two year prospective cohort study. J Affect Disord 2011; 133 51–60.
| Implementation of psychological therapies for anxiety and depression in routine practice: two year prospective cohort study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21501876PubMed |
[12] Clark DM, Canvin L, Green J, Layard R, Pilling S, Janecka M. Transparency about the outcomes of mental health services (IAPT approach): an analysis of public data. Lancet 2018; 391 679–86.
| Transparency about the outcomes of mental health services (IAPT approach): an analysis of public data.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 29224931PubMed |
[13] Baigent M, Smith D, Battersby M, Lawn S, Redpath P, McCoy A. The Australian version of IAPT: clinical outcomes of the multi-site cohort study of NewAccess. J Ment Health 2020;
| The Australian version of IAPT: clinical outcomes of the multi-site cohort study of NewAccess.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 32394756PubMed |
[14] R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2019. Available at: https://www.R-project.org/
[15] Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. 2nd edn. L. Erlbaum Associates; 1988.
[16] Matthey S. p < .05 – But is it clinically significant? Practical examples for clinicians. Behav Change 1998; 15 140–6.
| p < .05 – But is it clinically significant? Practical examples for clinicians.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[17] Dizon JM, Machingaidze S, Grimmer K. To adopt, to adapt, or to contextualise? The big question in clinical practice guideline development. BMC Res Notes 2016; 9 442
| To adopt, to adapt, or to contextualise? The big question in clinical practice guideline development.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 27623764PubMed |
[18] Knapstad M, Lervik LV, Sæther SMM, Aarø LE, Smith ORF. Effectiveness of prompt mental health care, the Norwegian version of improving access to psychological therapies: a randomized controlled trial. Psychother Psychosom 2020; 89 90–105.
| Effectiveness of prompt mental health care, the Norwegian version of improving access to psychological therapies: a randomized controlled trial.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 31794968PubMed |
[19] Muir-Cochrane E, O’Kane D, Barkway P, Oster C, Fuller J. Service provision for older people with mental health problems in a rural area of Australia. Aging Ment Health 2014; 18 759–66.
| Service provision for older people with mental health problems in a rural area of Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 24499436PubMed |
[20] van Gaans D, Dent E. Issues of accessibility to health services by older Australians: a review. Public Health Rev 2018; 39 20
| Issues of accessibility to health services by older Australians: a review.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 30027001PubMed |
[21] Black Dog Institute. Mental health ramifications of COVID-19: the Australian context. 2020. Available at: http://www.blackdoginstitute.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/20200319_covid19-evidence-and-reccomendations.pdf
