Compared with the traditional face-to-face format, therapist-guided internet interventions offer a different approach to supporting clients in learning skills to manage and overcome mental health difficulties. Such interventions are already in use within IAPT (Improving Access to Psychological Therapies) and other routine care settings, but given their potential to deliver treatment more efficiently and therefore increase availability and access to evidence-based interventions, their use is likely to increase significantly over the coming years. This article outlines what is meant by therapist-guided internet interventions and why an online format is thought to be advantageous for clients, therapists, services, and communities more broadly. It reviews the current evidence in the context of common therapist beliefs about internet-based treatment. It aims to identify gaps where further research is required, particularly in relation to the broader implementation of these treatments in IAPT and other routine clinical services. Specifically, it emphasises the importance of choosing the right programmes, providing adequate therapist training in their use, and considering practical and organisational issues, all of which are likely to determine the success of implementation efforts.

The Coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic is exerting unprecedented pressure on NHS Health and Social Care provisions, with frontline staff, such as those of critical care units, encountering vast practical and emotional challenges on a daily basis. Although staff are being supported through organisational provisions, facilitated by those in leadership roles, the emergence of mental health difficulties or the exacerbation of existing ones amongst these members of staff is a cause for concern. Acknowledging this, academics and healthcare professionals alike are calling for psychological support for frontline staff, which not only addresses distress during the initial phases of the outbreak but also over the months, if not years, that follow. Fortunately, mental health services and psychology professional bodies across the United Kingdom have issued guidance to meet these needs. An attempt has been made to translate these sets of guidance into clinical provisions via the recently established Homerton Covid Psychological Support (HCPS) pathway delivered by Talk Changes (Hackney & City IAPT). This article describes the phased, stepped-care and evidence-based approach that has been adopted by the service to support local frontline NHS staff. We wish to share our service design and pathway of care with other Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) services who may also seek to support hospital frontline staff within their associated NHS Trusts and in doing so, lay the foundations of a coordinated response.

Around a quarter of patients treated in intensive care units (ICUs) will develop symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Given the dramatic increase in ICU admissions during the COVID-19 pandemic, clinicians are likely to see a rise in post-ICU PTSD cases in the coming months. Post-ICU PTSD can present various challenges to clinicians, and no clinical guidelines have been published for delivering trauma-focused cognitive behavioural therapy with this population. In this article, we describe how to use cognitive therapy for PTSD (CT-PTSD), a first line treatment for PTSD recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Using clinical case examples, we outline the key techniques involved in CT-PTSD, and describe their application to treating patients with PTSD following ICU.

Treatment outcomes across Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) services in England have improved year-on-year, with the national average proportion of patients in recovery at the end of treatment now exceeding the 50% target. This is despite the number of referrals and numbers of treated patients also increasing year-on-year, suggesting that services have evolved local practices and treatment delivery to meet needs whilst improving performance. This study explores whether there have been changes in clinical practice with regard to: (1) the number of sessions and length of treatments; (2) the number of cancellations and non-attendance; and (3) the recording of problem descriptor information, and the association with treatment outcomes in IAPT. Routinely collected data from seven IAPT services involved in the North and Central East London (NCEL) IAPT Service Improvement and Research Network (SIRN) were brought together to form a dataset of nearly 88,000 patients who completed a course of IAPT treatment. Results showed that there was a slight increase in the average number of sessions, and decreases in the length of time in treatment, as well as decreases in both the number of non-attended appointments and the use of inappropriate problem descriptors. These findings highlight a number of areas where potentially small changes to clinical practice may have had positive effects on patient outcomes. The value of using IAPT data to inform service improvement evaluations is discussed.

Action-based methods such as behavioural experiments, role-play and (by extension) ‘chairwork’ are powerful techniques recommended in core supervisory texts for cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT). Despite this, experiential methods are seldom used by supervisors, suggesting that supervision often drifts from a ‘doing process’ to a ‘talking process’. A number of factors contribute to this divergence from best practice, including limited confidence and a lack of familiarity with experiential procedures amongst supervisors. To address this, the current paper presents a variety of action-based techniques for enhancing supervisees’ technical, perceptual, interpersonal, reflective and personal competencies. Behavioural experiments, empty-chair, multi-chair and role-playing exercises for maintaining treatment fidelity, enhancing empathic attunement, repairing therapeutic ruptures, resolving impasses and working through negative countertransference are described, amongst others. Further research is needed to establish the nature and extent of supervisory drift, as well as the efficacy of action-based methods.

The recent COVID-19 pandemic has triggered a surge in anxiety across the globe. Much of the public’s behavioural and emotional response to the virus can be understood through the framework of terror management theory, which proposes that fear of death drives much of human behaviour. In the context of the current pandemic, death anxiety, a recently proposed transdiagnostic construct, appears especially relevant. Fear of death has recently been shown to predict not only anxiety related to COVID-19, but also to play a causal role in various mental health conditions. Given this, it is argued that treatment programmes in mental health may need to broaden their focus to directly target the dread of death. Notably, cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) has been shown to produce significant reductions in death anxiety. As such, it is possible that complementing current treatments with specific CBT techniques addressing fears of death may ensure enhanced long-term symptom reduction. Further research is essential in order to examine whether treating death anxiety will indeed improve long-term outcomes, and prevent the emergence of future disorders in vulnerable populations.

The present study aimed to explore patients’ experience with an Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) service, and to investigate the reasons for discontinuing their treatment. A qualitative approach was adopted using thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews carried out with 818 patients attending for treatment in Talking Change from November 2015 to January 2019, retrospectively. The five main themes that emerged from the study were: ‘Felt better’, ‘Issues with group settings’, ‘Therapeutic alliance breakdown’, ‘Miscommunication’ and ‘Impracticalities’. The qualitative study uncovered a wide range of reasons for people who had dropped out from their treatment. The findings mainly emphasised general dissatisfaction and inconvenient appointments. However, improvement in symptoms of depression and anxiety was also identified as a key factor among patients who discontinued their treatment. This recovery is known as ‘progress withdrawal’ in which patients withdraw from treatment early due to good therapeutic progress. We present clinical and procedural implications arising from these themes.

People with obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) are likely to be more susceptible to the mental health impact of COVID-19. This paper shares the perspectives of expert clinicians working with OCD considering how to identify OCD in the context of COVID-19, changes in the presentation, and importantly what to consider when undertaking cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) for OCD in the current climate. The expert consensus is that although the presentation of OCD and treatment may have become more difficult, CBT should still continue remotely unless there are specific reasons for it not to, e.g. increase in risk, no access to computer, or exposure tasks or behavioural experiments cannot be undertaken. The authors highlight some of the considerations to take in CBT in light of our current understanding of COVID-19, including therapists and clients taking calculated risks when developing behavioural experiments and exposure tasks, considering viral loading and vulnerability factors. Special considerations for young people and perinatal women are discussed, as well as foreseeing what life may be like for those with OCD after the pandemic is over.

Remote delivery of evidence-based psychological therapies via video conference has become particularly relevant following the COVID-19 pandemic, and is likely to be an on-going method of treatment delivery post-COVID. Remotely delivered therapy could be of particular benefit for people with social anxiety disorder (SAD), who tend to avoid or delay seeking face-to-face therapy, often due to anxiety about travelling to appointments and meeting mental health professionals in person. Individual cognitive therapy for SAD (CT-SAD), based on the Clark and Wells (1995) model, is a highly effective treatment that is recommended as a first-line intervention in NICE guidance (NICE, 2013). All of the key features of face-to-face CT-SAD (including video feedback, attention training, behavioural experiments and memory-focused techniques) can be adapted for remote delivery. In this paper, we provide guidance for clinicians on how to deliver CT-SAD remotely, and suggest novel ways for therapists and patients to overcome the challenges of carrying out a range of behavioural experiments during remote treatment delivery.

The paper forms part of a series of papers outlining the theoretical framework for a new model of uncertainty distress (this paper), treatment implications arising from the model, and empirical tests of the model. We define uncertainty distress as the subjective negative emotions experienced in response to the as yet unknown aspects of a given situation. In the first paper we draw on a robust body of research on distinct areas including: threat models of anxiety, perceived illness uncertainty and intolerance of uncertainty. We explore how threat and uncertainty are separable in anxiety and how we can understand behaviours in response to uncertainty. Finally, we propose a clinically, theoretically and empirically informed model for uncertainty distress, and outline how this model can be tested. Caveats, clinical applications and practitioner key points are briefly included, although these are more fully outlined in the treatment implications article. While we outline this model in the context of novel coronavirus (COVID-19), the model has broader applications to both mental and physical health care settings.