BackgroundThere is a growing interest in using cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) with people who have Asperger syndrome and comorbid mental health problems.AimsTo examine whether modified group CBT for clinically significant anxiety in an Asperger syndrome population is feasible and likely to be efficacious.MethodUsing a randomised assessor-blind trial, 52 individuals with Asperger syndrome were randomised into a treatment arm or a waiting-list control arm. After 24 weeks, those in the waiting-list control arm received treatment, while those initially randomised to treatment were followed up for 24 weeks.ResultsThe conversion rate for this trial was high (1.6:1), while attrition was 13%. After 24 weeks, there was no significant difference between those randomised to the treatment arm compared with those randomised to the waiting-list control arm on the primary outcome measure, the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety.ConclusionsTrials of psychological therapies with this population are feasible. Larger definitive trials are now needed.Declaration of interestNone.Copyright and usage© The Royal College of Psychiatrists 2016. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence.

IntroductionA number of studies have established that children, adolescents and adults with Asperger syndrome (AS) and high functioning autism (HFA) have significant problems with anxiety. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is an effective treatment for anxiety in a variety of clinical populations. There is a growing interest in exploring the effectiveness of CBT for people with AS who have mental health problems, but currently there are no known clinical trials involving adults with AS or HFA. Studies with children who have AS have reported some success. The current study aims to examine whether modified group CBT for clinically significant anxiety in an AS population is likely to be efficacious.Methods and analysisThis study is a randomised, single-blind crossover trial. At least 36 individuals will be recruited and randomised into a treatment arm or a waiting-list control arm. During treatment, individuals will receive 3 sessions of individual CBT, followed by 21 sessions of group CBT. Primary outcome measures focus on anxiety. Secondary outcome measures focus on everyday social and psychiatric functioning, additional measures of anxiety and fear, depression, health-related quality of life and treatment cost. Assessments will be administered at pregroup and postgroup and at follow-up by researchers who are blinded to group allocation. The trial aims to find out whether or not psychological treatments for anxiety can be adapted and used to successfully treat the anxiety experienced by people with AS. Furthermore, we aim to determine whether this intervention represents good value for money.Ethics and disseminationThe trial received a favourable ethical opinion from a National Health Service (NHS) Research Ethics Committee. All participants provided written informed consent. Findings will be shared with all trial participants, and the general public, as well as the scientific community.Trial RegistrationISRCTN 30265294 (DOI: 10.1186/ISRCTN30265294), UKCRN 8370.

Purpose There is an international drive to improve mental health services for young people. This study aims to investigate service user experience of a youth mental health service in Norfolk, UK. In addition to suggesting improvements to this service, recommendations are made for the development of youth mental health services in general. Design/methodology/approach A mixed-methods approach was used. Quantitative data from satisfaction questionnaires were analysed using descriptive statistics and compared between two time points. A semi-structured interview was used to generate qualitative data. Thematic analysis was used to identify themes in the interview transcripts and triangulation was used to synthesise quantitative and qualitative data. Findings Service users appeared satisfied with the service. Significant improvements in satisfaction were found between two time points. Qualitative analysis identified three main themes that were important to service users, including support, information and personhood. Practical implications Recommendations for the development of youth mental health services are provided. Although these are based on findings from the Norfolk youth service, they are likely to apply to other mental health services for young people. Originality/value Mental health care for young people requires significant improvement. The Norfolk youth service is one of the first services of its kind in the UK. The findings from this study might be helpful to consider in the development of youth mental health services across the world.

Background: There is a growing interest in using group cognitive–behavioral therapy (CBT) with people who have Asperger syndrome (AS) and comorbid mental health problems. This study aims to assess the cost-effectiveness of modified group CBT for adults with AS experiencing co-occurring anxiety compared to treatment-as-usual. Methods: Economic evaluation alongside a pilot, multicenter, single-blind, randomized controlled crossover trial. Costs from the UK public sector (National Health Service and Social Services) and societal perspectives, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), incremental net (monetary) benefit (INB), expected value of perfect information, expected value of sample information, expected net gain of sampling, and efficient sample size of a future trial are reported. Results: Over 48 weeks, from the societal perspective, CBT results in additional costs of £6,647, with only a 0.015 incremental gain in QALYs, leading to a negative INB estimate of £6,206 and a 23% probability of cost-effectiveness at a threshold of £30,000/QALY. Results from sensitivity analyses support the unlikely cost-effectiveness of CBT but indicate the potential for cost-effectiveness over longer time horizons. Eliminating decision uncertainty is valued at £277 million, and the efficient sample size for a future trial is estimated at 1,200 participants per arm. Limitations: Relatively small sample size and prevalence of missing data present challenges to the interpretation of the results. Conclusions: Current evidence from this small pilot study suggests that, on average, modified group CBT is not cost-effective. However, there is much decision uncertainty so such a conclusion could be wrong. A large, full-scale trial to reduce uncertainty would be an efficient investment for the UK health economy.