Promoting Mental Health Following the London Bombings: A Screen and Treat Approach

Following the 2005 London bombings, a novel public health program was instituted to address the mental health needs of survivors. In this article, the authors describe the rationale for the program, characteristics of individuals assessed within the program, and preliminary outcome data. In addition to validated screening instruments and routine service usage data, standardized questionnaire outcome measures were collected. Seventy-one percent of individuals screened positive for a mental disorder. Of those receiving a more detailed clinical assessment, PTSD was the predominant diagnosis. Preliminary outcome data on 82 patients revealed large effect sizes for treatment comparable to those previously obtained in randomized controlled trials. The program succeeded in its aim of generating many more referrals of affected individuals than came through normal referral channels

Methods for specifying the target difference in a randomised controlled trial : the Difference ELicitation in TriAls (DELTA) systematic review

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Ambivalence in narrative therapy: a comparison between recovered and unchanged cases

Research on the identification of poor outcome predictors is crucial for the prevention of therapeutic failure. Previous research suggests that clients’ persistent ambivalence is one possible path to unsuccessful psychotherapy. The present study analyses ambivalence—here operationalized as return-tothe-problem markers (RPMs)—in five recovered and five unchanged cases of narrative psychotherapy for major depression. The results suggest that both recovered and unchanged cases presented a similar proportion of RPMs at baseline and a decreasing pattern of these ambivalence markers throughout therapy. However, the decreasing was more accentuated in recovered than in unchanged cases, and at the end of the treatment, the proportion of RPMs of the unchanged cases was significantly higher. The results are discussed in light of previous research on ambivalence in psychotherapy, focusing on the meaning of ambivalence and its clinical implications

Acupuncture and counselling for depression in primary care : a randomised controlled trial

Background: Depression is a significant cause of morbidity. Many patients have communicated an interest in nonpharmacological therapies to their general practitioners. Systematic reviews of acupuncture and counselling for depression in primary care have identified limited evidence. The aim of this study was to evaluate acupuncture versus usual care and counselling versus usual care for patients who continue to experience depression in primary care. Methods and Findings: In a randomised controlled trial, 755 patients with depression (Beck Depression Inventory BDI-II score $20) were recruited from 27 primary care practices in the North of England. Patients were randomised to one of three arms using a ratio of 2:2:1 to acupuncture (302), counselling (302), and usual care alone (151). The primary outcome was the difference in mean Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) scores at 3 months with secondary analyses over 12 months follow-up. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. PHQ-9 data were available for 614 patients at 3 months and 572 patients at 12 months. Patients attended a mean of ten sessions for acupuncture and nine sessions for counselling. Compared to usual care, there was a statistically significant reduction in mean PHQ-9 depression scores at 3 months for acupuncture (22.46, 95% CI 23.72 to 21.21) and counselling (21.73, 95% CI 23.00 to 20.45), and over 12 months for acupuncture (21.55, 95% CI 22.41 to 20.70) and counselling (21.50, 95% CI 22.43 to 20.58). Differences between acupuncture and counselling were not significant. In terms of limitations, the trial was not designed to separate out specific from non-specific effects. No serious treatment-related adverse events were reported. Conclusions: In this randomised controlled trial of acupuncture and counselling for patients presenting with depression, after having consulted their general practitioner in primary care, both interventions were associated with significantly reduced depression at 3 months when compared to usual care alone