Does Five Session CAT Consultancy Lead to Improved Outcomes?

NCT03998072 | Unknown

• 1 other identifier: 160787
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 24
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

Five session CAT (Cognitive Analytic Therapy) consultancy was developed for patients whom services 'struggle to help', such as those with diagnoses of personality disorder. Five session CAT consultancy works with both patients and care coordinators, utilising key elements of CAT including reciprocal roles and reformulation to inform care planning and case management. The proposed study expands on the existing evidence base by utilising a comparator; a treatment as usual condition. The proposed mixed methods feasibility study will compare outcomes for both patients and care coordinators to assess the effectiveness of the intervention compared to controls in a community mental health team.

Conditions

Psychological Intervention; Treatment as Usual

Keywords

psychology; cognitive analytic therapy

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (2)

• Personality Structure Questionnaire (PSQ)

  Primary outcome measure for patients utilised to measure change across multiple time-points. The PSQ is an 8-item measure of identity disturbance. Each item is rated using a 5-point Likert scale. The maximum score on the scale is 40, indicating a high level of identity disturbance.

  Screening (point of referral), start of waiting list (up to 2 weeks), end of waiting list (up to 12 weeks), start of treatment (up to 12 weeks), end of treatment (up to 22 weeks), 8 week follow-up (up to 30 weeks), 12 week follow-up (up to 34 weeks)

• Perceived competence scale

  Primary outcome measure for care coordinators utilised to measure change across multiple time-points. The Perceived Competence Scale is a four item Likert-scale ranging from 1 to 7. The maximum score for each item is 7, and the maximum overall score for the scale is 28, indicating the highest levels of perceived competence.

  Screening (point of referral), start of waiting list (up to 2 weeks), end of waiting list (up to 12 weeks), start of treatment (up to 12 weeks), end of treatment (up to 22 weeks), 8 week follow-up (up to 30 weeks), 12 week follow-up (up to 34 weeks)

Secondary Outcomes (3)

• Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (CORE-10)

  Screening (point of referral), start of waiting list (up to 2 weeks), end of waiting list (up to 12 weeks), start of treatment (up to 12 weeks), end of treatment (up to 22 weeks), 8 week follow-up (up to 30 weeks), 12 week follow-up (up to 34 weeks)

• Working Alliance Inventory Short-Revised (WAI-SR)

  Screening (point of referral), start of waiting list (up to 2 weeks), end of waiting list (up to 12 weeks), start of treatment (up to 12 weeks), end of treatment (up to 22 weeks), 8 week follow-up (up to 30 weeks), 12 week follow-up (up to 34 weeks)

• Doubt Subscale of the Mental Health Professionals Stress Scale (MHPSS)

  Screening (point of referral), start of waiting list (up to 2 weeks), end of waiting list (up to 12 weeks), start of treatment (up to 12 weeks), end of treatment (up to 22 weeks), 8 week follow-up (up to 30 weeks), 12 week follow-up (up to 34 weeks)

Study Arms (2)

Intervention

EXPERIMENTAL

Other: Five session cognitive analytic therapy (CAT) consultancy

Treatment as usual (waiting list control)

NO INTERVENTION

Interventions

Five session cognitive analytic therapy (CAT) consultancy OTHER

Five session consultancy with patients and care coordinators using cognitive analytic therapy

Intervention

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 18 Years - 100 Years
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: No
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• they are indicated as unsuitable for individual therapy,
• there is a poor or challenging relationship between the patient and the care coordinator(s)
• the care coordinator(s) feels a sense of 'stuckness' with the case
• the patient is chaotic

You may not qualify if:

• actively psychotic
• severely misusing substances
• have poor appointment attendance
• indicating that they are actively suicidal and unwilling to commit to trying to stay safe.

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Amrit Sinha: lead
• National Health Service, United Kingdom: collaborator

Study Sites (1)

Rotherham Doncaster and South Humber NHS Foundation Trust

Rotherham, United Kingdom

Location

Central Study Contacts

Amrit Sinha

CONTACT

01142226650; a.sinha@sheffield.ac.uk

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: NONE
• Purpose: TREATMENT
• Intervention Model: CROSSOVER
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: SPONSOR INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Research Support Officer

Model Details: The study will utilise two conditions - intervention and waiting list. Participants on the waiting list will then proceed to the intervention condition.

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: May 28, 2019
• First Posted: June 25, 2019
• Study Start: September 1, 2019
• Primary Completion: August 1, 2020
• Study Completion: September 1, 2020
• Last Updated: July 5, 2019

Record last verified: 2019-07

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

GB (1)