Developing guided self-help for depression using the Medical Research Council complex interventions framework: A description of the modelling phase and results of an exploratory randomised controlled trial

56Citations
Citations of this article
207Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Current guidelines for the management of depression suggest the use of guided self-help for patients with mild to moderate disorders. However, there is little consensus concerning the optimal form and delivery of this intervention. To develop acceptable and effective interventions, a phased process has been proposed, using a modelling phase to examine and develop an intervention prior to preliminary testing in an exploratory trial. This paper (a) describes the modelling phase used to develop a guided self-help intervention for depression in primary care and (b) reports data from an exploratory randomised trial of the intervention. Methods: A guided self-help intervention was developed following a modelling phase which involved a systematic review, meta synthesis and a consensus process. The intervention was then tested in an exploratory randomised controlled trial by examining (a) fidelity using analysis of taped guided self-help sessions (b) acceptability to patients and professionals through qualitative interviews (c) effectiveness through estimation of the intervention effect size. Results: Fifty eight patients were recruited to the exploratory trial. Seven professionals and nine patients were interviewed, and 22 tapes of sessions analysed for fidelity. Generally, fidelity to the intervention protocol was high, and the professionals delivered the majority of the specific components (with the exception of the use of feedback). Acceptability to both professionals and patients was also high. The effect size of the intervention on outcomes was small, and in line with previous analyses showing the modest effect of guided self-help in primary care. However, the sample size was small and confidence intervals around the effectiveness estimate were wide. Conclusion: The general principles of the modelling phase adopted in this study are designed to draw on a range of evidence, potentially providing an intervention that is evidence-based, patient-centred and acceptable to professionals. However, the pilot outcome data did not suggest that the intervention developed was particularly effective. The advantages and disadvantages of the general methods used in the modelling phase are discussed, and possible reasons for the failure to demonstrate a larger effect in this particular case are outlined. © 2008 Lovell et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

References Powered by Scopus

The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research. Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations

62671Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The PHQ-9: Validity of a brief depression severity measure

31694Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Mediators and moderators of treatment effects in randomized clinical trials

2126Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Normalisation process theory: A framework for developing, evaluating and implementing complex interventions

865Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Influence of initial severity of depression on effectiveness of low intensity interventions: Meta-analysis of individual patient data

249Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Integrated primary care for patients with mental and physical multimorbidity: Cluster randomised controlled trial of collaborative care for patients with depression comorbid with diabetes or cardiovascular disease

217Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Lovell, K., Bower, P., Richards, D., Barkham, M., Sibbald, B., Roberts, C., … Hennessy, S. (2008). Developing guided self-help for depression using the Medical Research Council complex interventions framework: A description of the modelling phase and results of an exploratory randomised controlled trial. BMC Psychiatry, 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-8-91

Readers over time

‘10‘11‘12‘13‘14‘15‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘24‘2509182736

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 89

59%

Researcher 36

24%

Professor / Associate Prof. 20

13%

Lecturer / Post doc 5

3%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Psychology 59

45%

Medicine and Dentistry 30

23%

Nursing and Health Professions 21

16%

Social Sciences 21

16%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0