IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0214715.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of a progressive stepped care approach in an improving access to psychological therapies service: An observational study

Author

Listed:
  • Lisa Boyd
  • Emma Baker
  • Joe Reilly

Abstract

England’s national Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) programme advocates stepped care as its organizational delivery of psychological therapies to common mental health problems. There is limited evidence regarding the efficacy of stepped care as a service delivery model, heterogeneity of definition and differences in model implementation in both research and routine practice, hence outcome comparison in terms of effectiveness of model is difficult. Despite sound evidence of the efficacy of low intensity interventions there appears to be a perpetuation of the notion that severity and complexity should only be treated by a high intensity intervention through the continuation of a stratified care model. Yet no psychotherapy treatment is found to be more superior to another, and not enough is known about what works for whom to aid the matching of treatment decision. In the absence of understanding precise treatment factors optimal for recovery, it may be useful to better understand the impact of a service delivery model, and whether different models achieve different outcomes. This study aims to contribute to the discussion regarding the stepped care definition and delivery, and explores the impact on clinical outcomes where different types of stepped care have been implemented within the same service. An observational cohort study analysed retrospective data (n = 16,723) over a 4 year period, in a single IAPT service, where delivery changed from one type of stepped care model to another. We compared the outcomes of treatment completers with a stratified care model and a progression care model. We also explored the assumption that patients who score severe on psychological measures, and therefore are potentially complex, would achieve better outcomes in a stratified model. Outcomes in each model type were compared, alongside baseline factor variables. A significant association was observed between a recovery outcome and model type, with patients 1.5 times more likely to recover in the progression delivery model. The potential implications are that with a progression stepped care model of service delivery, more patients can be treated with a lower intensity intervention, even with initial severe presentations, ensuring that only those that need high intensity CBT or equivalent are stepped up. This could provide services with an effective clinical model that is efficient and potentially more cost effective.

Suggested Citation

  • Lisa Boyd & Emma Baker & Joe Reilly, 2019. "Impact of a progressive stepped care approach in an improving access to psychological therapies service: An observational study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-16, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0214715
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0214715
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0214715
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0214715&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0214715?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. R. Laynard & D. Clark & M. Knapp & G. Mayraz, 2007. "Cost-benefit analysis of psychological therapy," National Institute Economic Review, National Institute of Economic and Social Research, vol. 202(1), pages 90-98, October.
    2. Jürgen Barth & Thomas Munder & Heike Gerger & Eveline Nüesch & Sven Trelle & Hansjörg Znoj & Peter Jüni & Pim Cuijpers, 2013. "Comparative Efficacy of Seven Psychotherapeutic Interventions for Patients with Depression: A Network Meta-Analysis," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-17, May.
    3. Richard Layard & CEP Mental Health Policy Group, 2006. "The Depression Report: A New Deal for Depression and Anxiety Disorders," CEP Reports 15, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Böckerman, Petri & Johansson, Edvard & Saarni, Samuli I., 2011. "Do established health-related quality-of-life measures adequately capture the impact of chronic conditions on subjective well-being?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 91-95, April.
    2. Eldon Spackman & Stewart Richmond & Mark Sculpher & Martin Bland & Stephen Brealey & Rhian Gabe & Ann Hopton & Ada Keding & Harriet Lansdown & Sara Perren & David Torgerson & Ian Watt & Hugh MacPherso, 2014. "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Acupuncture, Counselling and Usual Care in Treating Patients with Depression: The Results of the ACUDep Trial," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(11), pages 1-12, November.
    3. Richard Layard, 2012. "How Mental Illness Loses Out in the NHS A report by The Centre for Economic Performance's Mental Health Policy Group," CEP Reports 26, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    4. R. Laynard & D. Clark & M. Knapp & G. Mayraz, 2007. "Cost-benefit analysis of psychological therapy," National Institute Economic Review, National Institute of Economic and Social Research, vol. 202(1), pages 90-98, October.
    5. Patricia Gual-Montolio & Irene Jaén & Verónica Martínez-Borba & Diana Castilla & Carlos Suso-Ribera, 2022. "Using Artificial Intelligence to Enhance Ongoing Psychological Interventions for Emotional Problems in Real- or Close to Real-Time: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-21, June.
    6. Powdthavee, Nattavudh & van den Berg, Bernard, 2011. "Putting different price tags on the same health condition: Re-evaluating the well-being valuation approach," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 1032-1043.
    7. Gruber, Jonathan & Lordan, Grace & Pilling, Stephen & Propper, Carol & Saunders, Rob, 2022. "The impact of mental health support for the chronically ill on hospital utilisation: Evidence from the UK," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 294(C).
    8. David Ekers & Lisa Webster & Annemieke Van Straten & Pim Cuijpers & David Richards & Simon Gilbody, 2014. "Behavioural Activation for Depression; An Update of Meta-Analysis of Effectiveness and Sub Group Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-11, June.
    9. Layard, Richard & Chisholm, Dan & Patel, Vikram & Saxena, Shekhar, 2013. "Mental Illness and Unhappiness," IZA Discussion Papers 7620, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    10. van der Wal, C. Natalie & Kok, Robin N., 2019. "Laughter-inducing therapies: Systematic review and meta-analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 232(C), pages 473-488.
    11. Ralph Chapman & Nicholas Preval & Philippa Howden-Chapman, 2017. "How Economic Analysis Can Contribute to Understanding the Links between Housing and Health," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-12, August.
    12. George Irvin, 2007. "Happiness and Pareto," ICER Working Papers 27-2007, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
    13. Tim Bothe & Josephine Jacob & Christoph Kröger & Jochen Walker, 2020. "How expensive are post-traumatic stress disorders? Estimating incremental health care and economic costs on anonymised claims data," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(6), pages 917-930, August.
    14. Paweł Rasmus & Anna Lipert & Krzysztof Pękala & Małgorzata Timler & Elżbieta Kozłowska & Katarzyna Robaczyńska & Tomasz Sobów & Remigiusz Kozłowski & Michał Marczak & Dariusz Timler, 2021. "The Influence of a Psychosocial Rehabilitation Program in a Community Health Setting for Patients with Chronic Mental Disorders," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-11, April.
    15. Colin Green & David A Richards & Jacqueline J Hill & Linda Gask & Karina Lovell & Carolyn Chew-Graham & Peter Bower & John Cape & Stephen Pilling & Ricardo Araya & David Kessler & J Martin Bland & Sim, 2014. "Cost-Effectiveness of Collaborative Care for Depression in UK Primary Care: Economic Evaluation of a Randomised Controlled Trial (CADET)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(8), pages 1-12, August.
    16. Richard Layard, 2010. "The Greatest Happiness Principle: Its Time Has Come," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 8(4), pages 26-31, 01.
    17. Clark, David M. & Layard, Richard & Smithies, Rachel, 2008. "Improving access to psychological therapy: initial evaluation of the two demonstration sites," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 51591, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. Leire Alcaniz & Ana Martínez-Pampliega & Marta Herrero, 2022. "Cost-Benefit Analysis of an Intervention in Divorced Parents: Implications for Society, Public Administrations and Family Visitation Centers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-11, March.
    19. Patricio V. Marquez, 2016. "Mental Health Among Displaced People and Refugees," World Bank Publications - Reports 25854, The World Bank Group.
    20. Mark Fabian, 2019. "Racing from Subjective Well-Being to Public Policy: A Review of The Origins of Happiness," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 20(6), pages 2011-2026, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0214715. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.