A stepped care approach to treating anxiety and depression is common in mental health services. Low-intensity interventions, typically based on cognitive behavioural principles, are offered first, followed by high-intensity therapy if required. In the English National Health Service Talking Therapies (NHS TT) programme, different types of therapists deliver low- and high-intensity interventions. ‘Stepping up’ therefore involves changing therapist, and often an additional wait, which could both disrupt treatment flow.

In NHS TT, many low-intensity therapists subsequently train at high intensity. Once dual-trained, they typically deliver only high-intensity treatment. With both skillsets, they could theoretically deliver a full stepped care pathway, avoiding potential disruption linked to stepping up.

To explore a blended treatment approach, where dual-trained therapists move between low- and high-intensity flexibly based on patient need.

Ten dual-trained therapists across 4 services treated 43 patients. Patients with clinical complexities more likely to eventually require high-intensity support were selected. Propensity score matching was used to identify matched control groups from a pool of patients who received stepped care. Treatment characteristics and clinical outcomes were compared. Feedback was obtained from patients, therapists and supervisors.

Compared with matched controls, who received low- then high-intensity treatment, blended treatment required four fewer sessions on average, saving a third of therapist time and was completed 121 days sooner. The reliable recovery rate (54.1%) was 9% higher than the stepped care group (44.7%), which is clinically, although not statistically, significant. Blended treatment showed a non-significantly higher reliable deterioration rate. Patient feedback was positive. Therapists and supervisors highlighted advantages alongside practical challenges.

The blended approach showed promise as an efficient and effective method to deliver therapy when clinicians are dual-trained. Larger-scale studies, and consideration of implementation challenges, are needed. However, results suggest that this approach could potentially offer more flexible and seamless care delivery.

The Enhanced Trauma Pathway (ETP) at Berkshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust was established in 2018 to manage high demand on a highly specialist psychology team called the Berkshire Traumatic Stress Service (BTSS). The ETP is used to treat complicated cases of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) within the IAPT service. However, because of the ETP there is now a cohort of Service Users (SUs) presenting to IAPT with a higher complexity than has been typical, presenting new challenges for the service. We aim to evaluate and redesign the ETP within IAPT to meet the needs of the changing population.

Clinically Led workforcE and Activity Redesign (CLEAR) is a workforce transformation methodology with four unique stages: i) Clinical Engagement: in-depth qualitative analysis of interview data from staff ii) Data Interrogation: cohort analysis using clinical and workforce data visualisations and analysis, iii) Innovation: developing novel solutions with insights from triangulated qualitative and quantitative data, iv) Recommendations: formulation of new models of care (NMOC) and smaller quick high impact service innovations. Thematic analysis was used for the qualitative data. Quantitative data analysis was conducted using the IAPT dataset.

27 semi-structured interviews were conducted with staff. SUs on the ETP had longer waiting times, their treatment took longer (18 sessions for ETP Vs 12 for core step 3) and they had lower recovery rates: 32.9% for ETP, 49.9% for core step 3 in IAPT and 57.3% for the whole IAPT service. SUs on the ETP presented with increased risk concerns, often not mitigated by stabilisation work offered. Thematic analysis also identified challenges with recruitment, a lack of qualified staff and inefficient use of skills across the pathway. Staff well-being was found to be paramount, however supporting staff was found to be challenging due to national constraints placed upon IAPT and the targets the service is asked to achieve. A series of recommendations were made including three options for a NMOC. The options suggested different ways to redesign the pathway including an option where there would be a trauma only team within IAPT working exclusively on the ETP.

This evaluation highlights the challenges for the ETP and identifies NMOC to reduce their impact on the service. Further work is required to assess the NMOC once it has been implemented and to further evaluate the needs of the SUs presenting to this service.