Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2011 Sep;50(3):298-309.
doi: 10.1348/014466510X520231. Epub 2011 Mar 8.

A pragmatic randomized controlled trial of a guided self-help intervention versus a waiting list control in a routine primary care mental health service

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

A pragmatic randomized controlled trial of a guided self-help intervention versus a waiting list control in a routine primary care mental health service

Mike Lucock et al. Br J Clin Psychol. 2011 Sep.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES. To evaluate the effectiveness of a two session guided self-help (GSH) intervention provided by primary care graduate mental health workers (PCGMHWs) in a primary care mental health service. DESIGN. Pragmatic randomized trial, with a wait list control design. METHOD. Patients presenting with significant anxiety and depression problems were given one or more self-help booklets at screening and randomly allocated to an immediate (ITG) or delayed treatment group (DTG). Following this, a two-session GSH intervention was provided by one of two PCGMHWs, with a review session to decide on the need for further intervention. The DTG began the intervention 8 weeks after the screening and the primary outcome was Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation - Outcome Measure (CORE-OM) scores after 8 weeks. RESULTS. A total of 63 patients were allocated to the ITG, 59 to the DTG. Analysis of covariance, carried out on an intention to treat basis, showed a significant treatment effect, F(1,98) = 15, p < .001, and a comparison of means at 8 weeks showed a significant difference, t(116) = 2.1 (95% CI [1.1, 5.9]), p= .042 with an effect size, d= 0.375. Taking the two groups together, CORE-OM scores for patients who completed the intervention reduced between screening and the review session by an average of 7.9 (95% CI [6.3, 9.5]), effect size of 1.2. Between screening and the review session, 47% showed a reliable and clinically significant improvement. CONCLUSIONS. The study provides some support for the effectiveness of a two-session GSH intervention and a stepped-care service model.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types