The present study aimed to explore patients’ experience with an Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) service, and to investigate the reasons for discontinuing their treatment. A qualitative approach was adopted using thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews carried out with 818 patients attending for treatment in Talking Change from November 2015 to January 2019, retrospectively. The five main themes that emerged from the study were: ‘Felt better’, ‘Issues with group settings’, ‘Therapeutic alliance breakdown’, ‘Miscommunication’ and ‘Impracticalities’. The qualitative study uncovered a wide range of reasons for people who had dropped out from their treatment. The findings mainly emphasised general dissatisfaction and inconvenient appointments. However, improvement in symptoms of depression and anxiety was also identified as a key factor among patients who discontinued their treatment. This recovery is known as ‘progress withdrawal’ in which patients withdraw from treatment early due to good therapeutic progress. We present clinical and procedural implications arising from these themes. Key learning aims (1) To explore what can cause discontinuation of therapy. (2) To obtain the experience of people who have received treatment and dropped out from Talking Change Psychological Therapy services. (3) To explore whether people recovered as part of the treatment withdrawal and what may have helped towards that recovery.
Background: Motivational factors are generally regarded as an important ingredient for change in therapy. However, there is currently a lack of available instruments that can measure clients’ readiness for change in therapy. Aim: The objective of this paper was to create an instrument, the Readiness for Therapy Questionnaire (RTQ), which could measure clients’ readiness for change. Method: The RTQ was created by researchers following analysis of themes drawn from a review of the literature and interviews with patients at the end of therapy. This included both people who completed therapy and those who dropped out. As part of the standard assessment process, the RTQ was administered to 349 participants (69.6% female and 30.4% male; mean age 37.1 years; 90.5% Caucasian) who were patients at a psychological therapy service for common mental health difficulties. Result: An initial 12-item scale was reduced to 6 items. This scale significantly correlated with post-therapy PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scores and changes in these scores across therapy. After controlling for baseline scores and demographic variables, a logistic regression showed that scores on this 6-item measure pre-therapy significantly predicted three outcome variables: completing therapy, being recovered on both PHQ-9 and GAD-7 post-therapy, and having a reliable change in both the PHQ-9 and GAD-7 post-therapy. However, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis showed the measure had poor sensitivity and specificity. Symptom severity did not have a significant impact on motivation to change. Conclusion: The RTQ is potentially a valid measure with useful clinical applications in treatment of common mental health difficulties.
Mental health professionals face a high degree of burnout. This study aimed to explore the effectiveness of Eye Movement Desensitisation and Reprocessing Group Traumatic Episode Protocol (EMDR G-TEP) at reducing distress and burnout in staff working within an Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) service and if outcomes changed over number of sessions attended. Twenty-two staff attended and measures examining burnout, and subjective distress ratings of the targeted memory were taken pre, post and 1 month follow-ups. 95.5% reported finding the sessions helpful. A statistically significant reduction was observed on total burnout, and personal and work-related subscales; and a significant improvement in subjective units of distress. There was no interaction in changes of burnout and number of sessions attended. EMDR G-TEP has the potential to offer a novel method to improve staff wellbeing within mental health settings. Further research is recommended.
IntroductionIn November 2020, The NHS for England launched a pilot High Intensity Service (HIS) programme for treating military veterans complex mental health problems. Seven regional grants were awarded to manage the HIS, including NHS Solent, in South East England. This paper details an evaluation of the HIS, which was conducted from February 2021 to August 2022.MethodsThis mixed-methods study gained quantitative data from a specifically designed questionnaire that included a number of validated psychometric questionnaires. These were completed by either HIS staff or beneficiaries at entry and exit from the HIS, and qualitative data were gained from semi-structured interviews with the HIS staff.ResultsData were sourced from 45 pre-questionnaires, 25 post programme questionnaires and 11 interviews. This evaluation identified reductions in situational stressors, symptoms and reported illnesses for veterans in crisis. There were reductions in depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder following programme exit. Staff reported that there was no notable changes in stress levels which appeared to remain high at programme exit. Staff interviews highlighted the importance of simultaneously understanding the social and psychological needs of veterans in mental health crisis. The benefits of integrating veteran staff members into military veteran health services were identified, demonstrating improvements in education around military culture in civilian services.ConclusionsThe importance of collaboration between clinical and veteran staff members in veteran health services was noted, demonstrating the positive impact social care provision has on veteran’s overall health and well-being. Veteran engagement with the service was advocated as a result of veterans accessing the service feeling understood. This first independent evaluation of the HIS provides a positive reflection, and adds to the limited empirical evidence exploring veteran engagement in health services.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.