Rapport vs 6 Sessions In High Intensity IAPT

The final straw for a friend working in High Intensity ‘I’ve just been told that in the 1st session , I must tell the client that in our service and nationally most people manage with 6 sessions in Step 3’. He’s had enough, sorting out his mortgage, then leaving for private practice!  We agreed that IAPT management seem to have never heard of the importance of rapport.

 

A study just published by Sara Antunes-Alves et all of 43 clients undergoing CBT for depression found that the only predictor of outcome was rapport, examples of this included exchanges where the therapist and client were joking , laughing together. In the study rapport was observer rated none of the competence skills predicted outcome, however the  study was small, technically underpowered and they may have been predictors with a bigger sample. Nevertheless the study is a salutary reminder of the importance of humanity. Antune-Alves et al (2018) Therapist interventions and patient outcome: addressing the common versus specific factor debate. Archives of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy 3, 7-35.  Interestingly clients had at least 12 therapy sessions with a maximum of 20, this is the number of sessions that quality research has found necessary for real world change. The ‘norming’ of 6 sessions in IAPT is an insult to clients and a betrayal of trust – a sub-therapeutic dose of treatment.

 

Dr Mike Scott

Deluded Secretary of State for Health and Social Care

Mr Matt Hancock has just announced on BBC Radio 4 that ‘our (mental health) services are better than almost any other services in the world’.  But how can he possibly know this – there has never been an independent assessment of the Government funded Improving Access to Psychological Therapies Service (IAPT), the latter have only ever marked their own homework. The Secretary of State might ask the National Audit Office why it has never published the results of its’ investigation into IAPT. My own study published in the Journal of Health Psychology in February of this year

https://www.dropbox.com/s/flvxtq2jyhmn6i1/IAPT%20The%20Need%20for%20Radical%20Reform.pdf?dl=0

suggests the recovery rate in Adult Services is just 15% far short of the Government target and IAPT’s claim of a 50% recovery.

 

Dr Mike Scott

Yesterday’s CBT for PTSD and Beyond ‘A really great workshop it was too’ –

‘Very interesting and lots of new ideas for approaching what can be a complicated mind field’. Delighted Christine Roberts twittered this response, thanks. It was a full house at the Lakeside Centre, Crosby, Liverpool, super day except for a microphone that had a life of its’ own!

 

But there was unanimous agreement from the 80 participants that generally therapists are a) stressed out b) daren’t publicly voice there discontent with IAPT. One person voiced that the customary IAPT 6 sessions is like putting a sticking plaster on a wound and all you get is a revolving door of clients. We need to stop the bleeding.

The voices of dissent are not in evidence at Nationally Organised BABCP Events, indeed I did not go to the Annual Conference because it looked like a further feast of uncritical acclaim of IAPT, reflected in the current issue of CBT Today.

The great thing at the Workshop is that we were able to address participants concerns e.g comorbid PTSD and OCD in a 15 year old. But we were all at a loss as to how to break out of the current mode of IAPT delivery, it seemed to resonate with being a citizen of some totalitarian state.

Dr Mike Scott