Early interventions for primary care patients with stress-related mental ill health: a randomised controlled non-inferiority trial of a nurse-led collaborative care intervention versus cognitive behavioural therapy

IF 6.6 0 PSYCHIATRY
Evelina Kontio,Victoria Sennerstam,Frank Svärdman,Conrad Samuelsson,Janina Hettman,Nathalie Broman,Ludwig Franke Föyen,Kersti Ejeby,Elin Lindsäter,Erik Hedman-Lagerlöf
{"title":"Early interventions for primary care patients with stress-related mental ill health: a randomised controlled non-inferiority trial of a nurse-led collaborative care intervention versus cognitive behavioural therapy","authors":"Evelina Kontio,Victoria Sennerstam,Frank Svärdman,Conrad Samuelsson,Janina Hettman,Nathalie Broman,Ludwig Franke Föyen,Kersti Ejeby,Elin Lindsäter,Erik Hedman-Lagerlöf","doi":"10.1136/bmjment-2026-302797","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Stress-related mental ill health is highly prevalent, and most individuals first seek help in primary care where access to psychological support is often limited. Objective To test whether nurse-led collaborative care (CC) is non-inferior to cognitive behavioural therapy delivered as psychologist-guided self-help (GSH-CBT) in reducing stress for adult primary care patients with stress-related mental ill health. Methods A randomised controlled non-inferiority trial where 172 adult primary care patients with mild to moderate stress-related mental ill health were allocated to nurse-led CC or GSH-CBT (1:1). The primary outcome was the Perceived Stress Scale-10 administered every 3 weeks during the 12-week treatment phase. The a priori non-inferiority margin was 0.3 d , requiring the one-sided 95% CI of the effect size to fall within this bound. Secondary outcomes were symptoms of exhaustion, sleep problems, depressive symptoms, general anxiety and quality of life. Findings In both conditions, participants showed large, significant within-group improvements on the primary outcome and all secondary outcomes. The primary outcome showed a small between-group difference ( d =0.22), favouring GSH-CBT, with the CI upper bound (0.52) exceeding the non-inferiority margin. For secondary outcomes, GSH-CBT led to a greater reduction in exhaustion ( d =0.28; 95% CI 0.64 to 0.002). No other between-group differences were observed. Conclusions Nurse-led CC was not non-inferior to GSH-CBT. Effect differences were small, but improvements were slightly larger in GSH-CBT. Clinical implications Given that nurse-led CC is safe, easy to administer, and that significant within-group improvements were observed across all measures, this intervention could be a viable option in primary care settings where psychologist-delivered treatment is limited.","PeriodicalId":72434,"journal":{"name":"BMJ mental health","volume":"13 1","pages":"e302797"},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ mental health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjment-2026-302797","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background Stress-related mental ill health is highly prevalent, and most individuals first seek help in primary care where access to psychological support is often limited. Objective To test whether nurse-led collaborative care (CC) is non-inferior to cognitive behavioural therapy delivered as psychologist-guided self-help (GSH-CBT) in reducing stress for adult primary care patients with stress-related mental ill health. Methods A randomised controlled non-inferiority trial where 172 adult primary care patients with mild to moderate stress-related mental ill health were allocated to nurse-led CC or GSH-CBT (1:1). The primary outcome was the Perceived Stress Scale-10 administered every 3 weeks during the 12-week treatment phase. The a priori non-inferiority margin was 0.3 d , requiring the one-sided 95% CI of the effect size to fall within this bound. Secondary outcomes were symptoms of exhaustion, sleep problems, depressive symptoms, general anxiety and quality of life. Findings In both conditions, participants showed large, significant within-group improvements on the primary outcome and all secondary outcomes. The primary outcome showed a small between-group difference ( d =0.22), favouring GSH-CBT, with the CI upper bound (0.52) exceeding the non-inferiority margin. For secondary outcomes, GSH-CBT led to a greater reduction in exhaustion ( d =0.28; 95% CI 0.64 to 0.002). No other between-group differences were observed. Conclusions Nurse-led CC was not non-inferior to GSH-CBT. Effect differences were small, but improvements were slightly larger in GSH-CBT. Clinical implications Given that nurse-led CC is safe, easy to administer, and that significant within-group improvements were observed across all measures, this intervention could be a viable option in primary care settings where psychologist-delivered treatment is limited.
初级保健患者压力相关精神疾病的早期干预:护士主导的协作护理干预与认知行为治疗的随机对照非劣效性试验
背景:与压力有关的精神疾病非常普遍,大多数人首先在初级保健中寻求帮助,而获得心理支持的机会往往有限。目的探讨护士主导的协同护理(CC)在减轻压力相关精神疾病成人初级保健患者的压力方面是否优于认知行为治疗(GSH-CBT)。方法采用随机对照非劣效性试验,将172例轻中度应激相关精神疾病的成人初级保健患者分为护士主导的CC组或GSH-CBT组(1:1)。主要结果是在12周治疗期间每3周进行一次感知压力量表-10。先验非劣效性裕度为0.3 d,要求效应大小的单侧95% CI落在此范围内。次要结果是疲劳症状、睡眠问题、抑郁症状、一般焦虑和生活质量。在这两种情况下,参与者在主要结局和所有次要结局上都表现出巨大的、显著的组内改善。主要结局显示组间差异较小(d =0.22),有利于GSH-CBT, CI上限(0.52)超过非劣效性界限。对于次要结局,GSH-CBT导致更大程度的衰竭减少(d =0.28; 95% CI 0.64至0.002)。未观察到其他组间差异。结论护士主导的CC治疗效果并非不逊于GSH-CBT。效果差异很小,但GSH-CBT的改善略大。鉴于护士主导的CC是安全的,易于管理的,并且在所有措施中观察到显著的组内改善,这种干预可能是初级保健机构中心理学家提供治疗有限的可行选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书