Comparative effectiveness of cognitive therapies delivered face-to-face or over the telephone: an observational study using propensity methods.

<h4>Objectives</h4>To compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of face-to-face (FTF) with over-the-telephone (OTT) delivery of low intensity cognitive behavioural therapy.<h4>Design</h4>Observational study following SROBE guidelines. Selection effects were controlled using...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Geoffrey C Hammond, Tim J Croudace, Muralikrishnan Radhakrishnan, Louise Lafortune, Alison Watson, Fiona McMillan-Shields, Peter B Jones
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2012-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0042916&type=printable
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849470584737497088
author Geoffrey C Hammond
Tim J Croudace
Muralikrishnan Radhakrishnan
Louise Lafortune
Alison Watson
Fiona McMillan-Shields
Peter B Jones
author_facet Geoffrey C Hammond
Tim J Croudace
Muralikrishnan Radhakrishnan
Louise Lafortune
Alison Watson
Fiona McMillan-Shields
Peter B Jones
author_sort Geoffrey C Hammond
collection DOAJ
description <h4>Objectives</h4>To compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of face-to-face (FTF) with over-the-telephone (OTT) delivery of low intensity cognitive behavioural therapy.<h4>Design</h4>Observational study following SROBE guidelines. Selection effects were controlled using propensity scores. Non-inferiority comparisons assessed effectiveness.<h4>Setting</h4>IAPT (improving access to psychological therapies) services in the East of England.<h4>Participants</h4>39,227 adults referred to IAPT services. Propensity score strata included 4,106 individuals; 147 pairs participated in 1:1 matching.<h4>Intervention</h4>Two or more sessions of computerised cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT).<h4>Main outcome measures</h4>Patient-reported outcomes: Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) for depression; Generalised Anxiety Disorder questionnaire (GAD-7); Work and Social Adjustment Scale (WSAS). Differences between groups were summarised as standardised effect sizes (ES), adjusted mean differences and minimally important difference for PHQ-9. Cost per session for OTT was compared with FTF.<h4>Results</h4>Analysis of covariance controlling for number of assessments, provider site, and baseline PHQ-9, GAD-7 and WSAS indicated statistically significantly greater reductions in scores for OTT treatment with moderate (PHQ-9: ES: 0.14; GAD-7: ES: 0.10) or small (WSAS: ES: 0.03) effect sizes. Non-inferiority in favour of OTT treatment for symptom severity persisted as small to moderate effects for all but individuals with the highest symptom severity. In the most stringent comparison, the one-to-one propensity matching, adjusted mean differences in treatment outcomes indicated non-inferiority between OTT versus FTF treatments for PHQ-9 and GAD-7, whereas the evidence was moderate for WSAS. The per-session cost for OTT was 36.2% lower than FTF.<h4>Conclusions</h4>The clinical effectiveness of low intensity CBT-based interventions delivered OTT was not inferior to those delivered FTF except for people with more severe illness where FTF was superior. This provides evidence for better targeting of therapy, efficiencies for patients, cost savings for services and greater access to psychological therapies for people with common mental disorders.
format Article
id doaj-art-d979d67127b247ea8ebc18b2e90ddf25
institution Kabale University
issn 1932-6203
language English
publishDate 2012-01-01
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
record_format Article
series PLoS ONE
spelling doaj-art-d979d67127b247ea8ebc18b2e90ddf252025-08-20T03:25:07ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032012-01-0179e4291610.1371/journal.pone.0042916Comparative effectiveness of cognitive therapies delivered face-to-face or over the telephone: an observational study using propensity methods.Geoffrey C HammondTim J CroudaceMuralikrishnan RadhakrishnanLouise LafortuneAlison WatsonFiona McMillan-ShieldsPeter B Jones<h4>Objectives</h4>To compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of face-to-face (FTF) with over-the-telephone (OTT) delivery of low intensity cognitive behavioural therapy.<h4>Design</h4>Observational study following SROBE guidelines. Selection effects were controlled using propensity scores. Non-inferiority comparisons assessed effectiveness.<h4>Setting</h4>IAPT (improving access to psychological therapies) services in the East of England.<h4>Participants</h4>39,227 adults referred to IAPT services. Propensity score strata included 4,106 individuals; 147 pairs participated in 1:1 matching.<h4>Intervention</h4>Two or more sessions of computerised cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT).<h4>Main outcome measures</h4>Patient-reported outcomes: Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) for depression; Generalised Anxiety Disorder questionnaire (GAD-7); Work and Social Adjustment Scale (WSAS). Differences between groups were summarised as standardised effect sizes (ES), adjusted mean differences and minimally important difference for PHQ-9. Cost per session for OTT was compared with FTF.<h4>Results</h4>Analysis of covariance controlling for number of assessments, provider site, and baseline PHQ-9, GAD-7 and WSAS indicated statistically significantly greater reductions in scores for OTT treatment with moderate (PHQ-9: ES: 0.14; GAD-7: ES: 0.10) or small (WSAS: ES: 0.03) effect sizes. Non-inferiority in favour of OTT treatment for symptom severity persisted as small to moderate effects for all but individuals with the highest symptom severity. In the most stringent comparison, the one-to-one propensity matching, adjusted mean differences in treatment outcomes indicated non-inferiority between OTT versus FTF treatments for PHQ-9 and GAD-7, whereas the evidence was moderate for WSAS. The per-session cost for OTT was 36.2% lower than FTF.<h4>Conclusions</h4>The clinical effectiveness of low intensity CBT-based interventions delivered OTT was not inferior to those delivered FTF except for people with more severe illness where FTF was superior. This provides evidence for better targeting of therapy, efficiencies for patients, cost savings for services and greater access to psychological therapies for people with common mental disorders.https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0042916&type=printable
spellingShingle Geoffrey C Hammond
Tim J Croudace
Muralikrishnan Radhakrishnan
Louise Lafortune
Alison Watson
Fiona McMillan-Shields
Peter B Jones
Comparative effectiveness of cognitive therapies delivered face-to-face or over the telephone: an observational study using propensity methods.
PLoS ONE
title Comparative effectiveness of cognitive therapies delivered face-to-face or over the telephone: an observational study using propensity methods.
title_full Comparative effectiveness of cognitive therapies delivered face-to-face or over the telephone: an observational study using propensity methods.
title_fullStr Comparative effectiveness of cognitive therapies delivered face-to-face or over the telephone: an observational study using propensity methods.
title_full_unstemmed Comparative effectiveness of cognitive therapies delivered face-to-face or over the telephone: an observational study using propensity methods.
title_short Comparative effectiveness of cognitive therapies delivered face-to-face or over the telephone: an observational study using propensity methods.
title_sort comparative effectiveness of cognitive therapies delivered face to face or over the telephone an observational study using propensity methods
url https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0042916&type=printable
work_keys_str_mv AT geoffreychammond comparativeeffectivenessofcognitivetherapiesdeliveredfacetofaceoroverthetelephoneanobservationalstudyusingpropensitymethods
AT timjcroudace comparativeeffectivenessofcognitivetherapiesdeliveredfacetofaceoroverthetelephoneanobservationalstudyusingpropensitymethods
AT muralikrishnanradhakrishnan comparativeeffectivenessofcognitivetherapiesdeliveredfacetofaceoroverthetelephoneanobservationalstudyusingpropensitymethods
AT louiselafortune comparativeeffectivenessofcognitivetherapiesdeliveredfacetofaceoroverthetelephoneanobservationalstudyusingpropensitymethods
AT alisonwatson comparativeeffectivenessofcognitivetherapiesdeliveredfacetofaceoroverthetelephoneanobservationalstudyusingpropensitymethods
AT fionamcmillanshields comparativeeffectivenessofcognitivetherapiesdeliveredfacetofaceoroverthetelephoneanobservationalstudyusingpropensitymethods
AT peterbjones comparativeeffectivenessofcognitivetherapiesdeliveredfacetofaceoroverthetelephoneanobservationalstudyusingpropensitymethods