Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorKnapstad, Marit
dc.contributor.authorLervik, Linn Vathne
dc.contributor.authorSæther, Solbjørg Makalani Myrtveit
dc.contributor.authorAarø, Leif Edvard
dc.contributor.authorSmith, Otto Robert Frans
dc.PublishedKnapstad M, Lervik LV, Sæther SMMS, Aarø LE, Smith ORF. Effectiveness of Prompt Mental Health Care, the Norwegian Version of Improving Access to Psychological Therapies: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics. 2020;89(2):90–105eng
dc.description.abstractBackground: The innovative treatment model Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) and its Norwegian adaptation, Prompt Mental Health Care (PMHC), have been evaluated by cohort studies only. Albeit yielding promising results, the extent to which these are attributable to the treatment thus remains unsettled. Objective: To investigate the effectiveness of the PMHC treatment compared to treatment as usual (TAU) at 6-month follow-up. Methods: A randomized controlled trial with parallel assignment was performed in two PMHC sites (Sandnes and Kristiansand) and enrolled clients between November 9, 2015 and August 31, 2017. Participants were 681 adults (aged ≥18 years) considered for admission to PMHC due to anxiety and/or mild to moderate depression (Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ-9]/Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale [GAD-7] scores above cutoff). These were randomly assigned (70:30 ratio; n = 463 to PMHC, n = 218 to TAU) with simple randomization within each site with no further constraints. The main outcomes were recovery rates and changes in symptoms of depression (PHQ-9) and anxiety (GAD-7) between baseline and follow-up. Primary outcome data were available for 73/67% in PMHC/TAU. Sensitivity analyses based on observed patterns of missingness were also conducted. Secondary outcomes were work participation, functional status, health-related quality of life, and mental well-being. Results: A reliable recovery rate of 58.5% was observed in the PMHC group and of 31.9% in the TAU group, equaling a between-group effect size of 0.61 (95% CI 0.37 to 0.85, p < 0.001). The differences in degree of improvement between PMHC and TAU yielded an effect size of –0.88 (95% CI –1.23 to –0.43, p < 0.001) for PHQ-9 and –0.60 (95% CI –0.90 to –0.30, p < 0.001) for GAD-7 in favor of PMHC. All sensitivity analyses pointed in the same direction, with small variations in point estimates. Findings were slightly more robust for depressive than anxiety symptoms. PMHC was also more effective than TAU in improving all secondary outcomes, except for work participation (z = 0.415, p = 0.69). Conclusions: The PMHC treatment was substantially more effective than TAU in alleviating the burden of anxiety and depression. This adaptation of IAPT is considered a viable supplement to existing health services to increase access to effective treatment for adults who suffer from anxiety and mild to moderate depression. A potential effect on work participation needs further examination.en_US
dc.rightsAttribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives CC BY-NC-NDeng
dc.titleEffectiveness of Prompt Mental Health Care, the Norwegian Version of Improving Access to Psychological Therapies: A Randomized Controlled Trialeng
dc.typePeer reviewed
dc.typeJournal article
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2019 The Authorseng
dc.source.journalPsychotherapy and Psychosomatics

Files in this item


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives CC BY-NC-ND
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives CC BY-NC-ND