{"title":"“谢谢,但不谢谢”:公众对参与NHS谈话疗法的反应——一个有益的故事?","authors":"Michael J. Scott","doi":"10.1002/capr.12852","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>The English NHS Talking Therapies has been hailed as a world leader in demonstrating outcomes, generating 1.76 million referrals in the year 2022–2023, with a claimed 49.9% recovery rate, but there has been a dearth of independent evaluations. Importantly, there have been no published data on those who only attended one assessment/treatment session. This also applies to public services internationally. The issue of the acceptability of psychological treatment has not been addressed.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>The user-friendliness of NHS Talking Therapies was examined, drawing on unpublished data revealed following a Freedom Of Information request response to the author in June 2024. These data are set alongside the service's published data to give a more comprehensive view of real-world outcomes and whether it should be a template for other countries to follow.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Almost half (45%) do not complete treatment, and for completers, the results are no better than for placebo. The diagnostic status of almost a third (29.1%) who attend just one session is unknown. The numbers of people who attend one assessment/ treatment session is approximately half of those who attend two or more treatment sessions, but the ratio varies by disorder.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>NHS Talking Therapies' engagement difficulties casts serious doubt on the service's claim to be a ‘world beater’. There is no evidence that NICE-compliant evidence-based psychological treatments have been delivered. While this model has been widely adopted in the UK, this should not be transferred to other service systems without contextualisation and evidence on whether/how some of its components could be implemented in those settings.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":46997,"journal":{"name":"Counselling & Psychotherapy Research","volume":"25 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/capr.12852","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘Thanks, but no thanks’: The public's response to engagement with NHS Talking Therapies – a salutary tale?\",\"authors\":\"Michael J. Scott\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/capr.12852\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>The English NHS Talking Therapies has been hailed as a world leader in demonstrating outcomes, generating 1.76 million referrals in the year 2022–2023, with a claimed 49.9% recovery rate, but there has been a dearth of independent evaluations. Importantly, there have been no published data on those who only attended one assessment/treatment session. This also applies to public services internationally. The issue of the acceptability of psychological treatment has not been addressed.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Method</h3>\\n \\n <p>The user-friendliness of NHS Talking Therapies was examined, drawing on unpublished data revealed following a Freedom Of Information request response to the author in June 2024. These data are set alongside the service's published data to give a more comprehensive view of real-world outcomes and whether it should be a template for other countries to follow.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Almost half (45%) do not complete treatment, and for completers, the results are no better than for placebo. The diagnostic status of almost a third (29.1%) who attend just one session is unknown. The numbers of people who attend one assessment/ treatment session is approximately half of those who attend two or more treatment sessions, but the ratio varies by disorder.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>NHS Talking Therapies' engagement difficulties casts serious doubt on the service's claim to be a ‘world beater’. There is no evidence that NICE-compliant evidence-based psychological treatments have been delivered. While this model has been widely adopted in the UK, this should not be transferred to other service systems without contextualisation and evidence on whether/how some of its components could be implemented in those settings.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46997,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Counselling & Psychotherapy Research\",\"volume\":\"25 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/capr.12852\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Counselling & Psychotherapy Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/capr.12852\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Counselling & Psychotherapy Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/capr.12852","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
‘Thanks, but no thanks’: The public's response to engagement with NHS Talking Therapies – a salutary tale?
Objectives
The English NHS Talking Therapies has been hailed as a world leader in demonstrating outcomes, generating 1.76 million referrals in the year 2022–2023, with a claimed 49.9% recovery rate, but there has been a dearth of independent evaluations. Importantly, there have been no published data on those who only attended one assessment/treatment session. This also applies to public services internationally. The issue of the acceptability of psychological treatment has not been addressed.
Method
The user-friendliness of NHS Talking Therapies was examined, drawing on unpublished data revealed following a Freedom Of Information request response to the author in June 2024. These data are set alongside the service's published data to give a more comprehensive view of real-world outcomes and whether it should be a template for other countries to follow.
Results
Almost half (45%) do not complete treatment, and for completers, the results are no better than for placebo. The diagnostic status of almost a third (29.1%) who attend just one session is unknown. The numbers of people who attend one assessment/ treatment session is approximately half of those who attend two or more treatment sessions, but the ratio varies by disorder.
Conclusion
NHS Talking Therapies' engagement difficulties casts serious doubt on the service's claim to be a ‘world beater’. There is no evidence that NICE-compliant evidence-based psychological treatments have been delivered. While this model has been widely adopted in the UK, this should not be transferred to other service systems without contextualisation and evidence on whether/how some of its components could be implemented in those settings.
期刊介绍:
Counselling and Psychotherapy Research is an innovative international peer-reviewed journal dedicated to linking research with practice. Pluralist in orientation, the journal recognises the value of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods strategies of inquiry and aims to promote high-quality, ethical research that informs and develops counselling and psychotherapy practice. CPR is a journal of the British Association of Counselling and Psychotherapy, promoting reflexive research strongly linked to practice. The journal has its own website: www.cprjournal.com. The aim of this site is to further develop links between counselling and psychotherapy research and practice by offering accessible information about both the specific contents of each issue of CPR, as well as wider developments in counselling and psychotherapy research. The aims are to ensure that research remains relevant to practice, and for practice to continue to inform research development.