改善心理治疗的可及性:COVID-19期间远程提供相关影响分析

IF 3.8 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Lora Capobianco, Irini Verbist, Calvin Heal, Dale Huey, Adrian Wells
{"title":"改善心理治疗的可及性:COVID-19期间远程提供相关影响分析","authors":"Lora Capobianco,&nbsp;Irini Verbist,&nbsp;Calvin Heal,&nbsp;Dale Huey,&nbsp;Adrian Wells","doi":"10.1111/bjc.12410","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>COVID-19 had an immediate impact on the way Improving Access to Psychological Therapy (IAPT) services in the United Kingdom were delivered, requiring services to move to remote therapy. While remote therapy has been shown to be effective, little is known about the effects associated with moving to remote therapy delivered during COVID-19 within IAPT services.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>The objective of the study was to assess the characteristics of those undergoing remote therapy and test the effects associated with the effect of remote delivery on anxiety and depression symptoms compared with in-person therapy before lockdown.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional benchmark comparison of remote therapy across four IAPT services in Greater Manchester. Routinely collected measures of anxiety (GAD-7) and depression (PHQ-9) were used to compare effects across the two time periods. A mixed-effects model was conducted to assess within and between group changes in anxiety and depression, while controlling for pre-specified confounders.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Findings</h3>\n \n <p>Remote therapy did not appear to impact on service provision, with the number of sessions offered and attended being similar to those prior to COVID-19. Both face-to-face (pre-COVID-19) and remote therapy (during COVID-19) were associated with variable improvements in anxiety and depression with no significant difference between them. However, remote therapy was associated with a more rapid decrease in symptoms in comparison with face-to-face treatment. Mean improvement in symptoms was small and increased as number of sessions/time increased and analysis of rates of improvement indicated that both face-to-face and remote therapy might need more time to reach target cut-off points on measures.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Both face-to-face and remote therapies delivered under IAPT were associated with improvements in symptoms with no apparent difference apart from the finding that remote therapy was associated with more rapid change.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Clinical Implications</h3>\n \n <p>Remote therapy delivery in IAPT does not appear to confer a disadvantage over face-to-face contact, but at a group mean level the magnitude of improvement associated with both treatments was small. Remote therapy provision may widen patient access to and engagement with psychological services.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48211,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Clinical Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bjc.12410","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Improving access to psychological therapies: Analysis of effects associated with remote provision during COVID-19\",\"authors\":\"Lora Capobianco,&nbsp;Irini Verbist,&nbsp;Calvin Heal,&nbsp;Dale Huey,&nbsp;Adrian Wells\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/bjc.12410\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>COVID-19 had an immediate impact on the way Improving Access to Psychological Therapy (IAPT) services in the United Kingdom were delivered, requiring services to move to remote therapy. While remote therapy has been shown to be effective, little is known about the effects associated with moving to remote therapy delivered during COVID-19 within IAPT services.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objective</h3>\\n \\n <p>The objective of the study was to assess the characteristics of those undergoing remote therapy and test the effects associated with the effect of remote delivery on anxiety and depression symptoms compared with in-person therapy before lockdown.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional benchmark comparison of remote therapy across four IAPT services in Greater Manchester. Routinely collected measures of anxiety (GAD-7) and depression (PHQ-9) were used to compare effects across the two time periods. A mixed-effects model was conducted to assess within and between group changes in anxiety and depression, while controlling for pre-specified confounders.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Findings</h3>\\n \\n <p>Remote therapy did not appear to impact on service provision, with the number of sessions offered and attended being similar to those prior to COVID-19. Both face-to-face (pre-COVID-19) and remote therapy (during COVID-19) were associated with variable improvements in anxiety and depression with no significant difference between them. However, remote therapy was associated with a more rapid decrease in symptoms in comparison with face-to-face treatment. Mean improvement in symptoms was small and increased as number of sessions/time increased and analysis of rates of improvement indicated that both face-to-face and remote therapy might need more time to reach target cut-off points on measures.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>Both face-to-face and remote therapies delivered under IAPT were associated with improvements in symptoms with no apparent difference apart from the finding that remote therapy was associated with more rapid change.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Clinical Implications</h3>\\n \\n <p>Remote therapy delivery in IAPT does not appear to confer a disadvantage over face-to-face contact, but at a group mean level the magnitude of improvement associated with both treatments was small. Remote therapy provision may widen patient access to and engagement with psychological services.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48211,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Clinical Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bjc.12410\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Clinical Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjc.12410\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Clinical Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjc.12410","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

2019冠状病毒病对英国“改善心理治疗可及性”服务的提供方式产生了直接影响,要求服务转向远程治疗。虽然远程治疗已被证明是有效的,但人们对在COVID-19期间在IAPT服务中转向远程治疗的相关影响知之甚少。目的本研究的目的是评估接受远程治疗的患者的特征,并测试远程分娩与禁闭前现场治疗对焦虑和抑郁症状的影响。方法:我们对大曼彻斯特地区四种IAPT服务的远程治疗进行了回顾性、横断面基准比较。使用常规收集的焦虑(GAD-7)和抑郁(PHQ-9)测量来比较两个时间段的效果。在控制预先指定的混杂因素的情况下,采用混合效应模型来评估组内和组间焦虑和抑郁的变化。远程治疗似乎对服务提供没有影响,提供和参加的会议数量与COVID-19之前的会议数量相似。面对面(COVID-19前)和远程治疗(COVID-19期间)都与焦虑和抑郁的不同改善相关,两者之间没有显著差异。然而,与面对面治疗相比,远程治疗能更快地减轻症状。症状的平均改善很小,并且随着治疗次数/时间的增加而增加,对改善率的分析表明,面对面和远程治疗可能需要更多的时间才能达到测量的目标分界点。结论IAPT下的面对面治疗和远程治疗均与症状改善相关,除了发现远程治疗与更快速的变化相关外,无明显差异。在IAPT中,远程治疗似乎并不比面对面治疗有劣势,但在组平均水平上,两种治疗的改善幅度都很小。远程治疗的提供可以扩大患者获得和参与心理服务的机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Improving access to psychological therapies: Analysis of effects associated with remote provision during COVID-19

Improving access to psychological therapies: Analysis of effects associated with remote provision during COVID-19

Background

COVID-19 had an immediate impact on the way Improving Access to Psychological Therapy (IAPT) services in the United Kingdom were delivered, requiring services to move to remote therapy. While remote therapy has been shown to be effective, little is known about the effects associated with moving to remote therapy delivered during COVID-19 within IAPT services.

Objective

The objective of the study was to assess the characteristics of those undergoing remote therapy and test the effects associated with the effect of remote delivery on anxiety and depression symptoms compared with in-person therapy before lockdown.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional benchmark comparison of remote therapy across four IAPT services in Greater Manchester. Routinely collected measures of anxiety (GAD-7) and depression (PHQ-9) were used to compare effects across the two time periods. A mixed-effects model was conducted to assess within and between group changes in anxiety and depression, while controlling for pre-specified confounders.

Findings

Remote therapy did not appear to impact on service provision, with the number of sessions offered and attended being similar to those prior to COVID-19. Both face-to-face (pre-COVID-19) and remote therapy (during COVID-19) were associated with variable improvements in anxiety and depression with no significant difference between them. However, remote therapy was associated with a more rapid decrease in symptoms in comparison with face-to-face treatment. Mean improvement in symptoms was small and increased as number of sessions/time increased and analysis of rates of improvement indicated that both face-to-face and remote therapy might need more time to reach target cut-off points on measures.

Conclusions

Both face-to-face and remote therapies delivered under IAPT were associated with improvements in symptoms with no apparent difference apart from the finding that remote therapy was associated with more rapid change.

Clinical Implications

Remote therapy delivery in IAPT does not appear to confer a disadvantage over face-to-face contact, but at a group mean level the magnitude of improvement associated with both treatments was small. Remote therapy provision may widen patient access to and engagement with psychological services.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
3.20%
发文量
57
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Clinical Psychology publishes original research, both empirical and theoretical, on all aspects of clinical psychology: - clinical and abnormal psychology featuring descriptive or experimental studies - aetiology, assessment and treatment of the whole range of psychological disorders irrespective of age group and setting - biological influences on individual behaviour - studies of psychological interventions and treatment on individuals, dyads, families and groups
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信