Effect of patient age on management decisions in breast cancer: consensus from a national consultation

This qualitative study investigated the attitudes, perceptions, and practices of breast cancer specialists with reference to the effect of patient age on management decisions in breast cancer, and attempted to identify national consensus on this issue. One hundred thirty-three relevant specialists, including 75 surgeons and 43 oncologists, participated in a virtual consultation using e-mailed questionnaires and open-ended discussion documents, culminating in the development of proposed consensus statements sent to participants for validation. A strong consensus was seen in favor of incorporating minimum standards of diagnostic services, treatment, and care for older patients with breast cancer into relevant national guidance, endorsed by professional bodies. Similarly, an overwhelming majority of participants agreed that simple, evidence-based protocols or guidelines on standardizing assessment of biological and chronological age should be produced by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence and the Scottish Medicines Consortium, developed in collaboration with specialist oncogeriatricians, and endorsed by professional bodies. A further recommendation that all breast cancer patient treatment and diagnostic procedures be undertaken in light of up-to-date, relevant scientific data met with majority support. This study was successful in gauging national specialist opinion regarding the effect of patient age on management decisions in breast cancer in the U.K.

Obsessive Compulsive Treatment Efficacy Trial (OCTET) comparing the clinical and cost effectiveness of self-managed therapies: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background: UK National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence guidelines for obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) specify recommendations for the treatment and management of OCD using a stepped care approach. Steps three to six of this model recommend treatment options for people with OCD that range from low-intensity guided self-help (GSH) to more intensive psychological and pharmacological interventions. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), including exposure and response prevention, is the recommended psychological treatment. However, whilst there is some preliminary evidence that self-managed therapy packages for OCD can be effective, a more robust evidence base of their clinical and cost effectiveness and acceptability is required. Methods/Design: Our proposed study will test two different self-help treatments for OCD: 1) computerised CBT (cCBT) using OCFighter, an internet-delivered OCD treatment package; and 2) GSH using a book. Both treatments will be accompanied by email or telephone support from a mental health professional. We will evaluate the effectiveness, cost and patient and health professional acceptability of the treatments. Discussion: This study will provide more robust evidence of efficacy, cost effectiveness and acceptability of self-help treatments for OCD. If cCBT and/or GSH prove effective, it will provide additional, more accessible treatment options for people with OCD.

Are the NICE guidelines for Obsessive Compulsive Disorder being used in primary care?

This study aims to: 1) assess the proportion of General Practioners (GPs) who are aware of or who have read the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE; 2005a) guidelines for Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD), 2) compare this with the proportion of other mental health disorders found by previous research and 3) establish the prevalence of OCD in primary care. Questionnaires were sent to all GPs (n = 795) and practice managers (n = 157) in Berkshire and Buckinghamshire, South East England. These contained 19 questions and took 5 min to complete. After the first set of responses, larger practices were visited and telephoned to encourage further responses. The response rates were 10.1% from GPs and 19.1% from practice managers. In all, 48.7% of the GPs were aware of the NICE guidelines for OCD and 30.3% reported that they had read them – higher than for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, but lower than for depression. Of registered patients, 0.2% were diagnosed with OCD, lower than the 1.1% found in epidemiological studies.

Enhancing recovery rates: lessons from year one of IAPT

BACKGROUND: The English Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) initiative aims to make evidence-based psychological therapies for depression and anxiety disorder more widely available in the National Health Service (NHS). 32 IAPT services based on a stepped care model were established in the first year of the programme. We report on the reliable recovery rates achieved by patients treated in the services and identify predictors of recovery at patient level, service level, and as a function of compliance with National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Treatment Guidelines. METHOD: Data from 19,395 patients who were clinical cases at intake, attended at least two sessions, had at least two outcomes scores and had completed their treatment during the period were analysed. Outcome was assessed with the patient health questionnaire depression scale (PHQ-9) and the anxiety scale (GAD-7). RESULTS: Data completeness was high for a routine cohort study. Over 91% of treated patients had paired (pre-post) outcome scores. Overall, 40.3% of patients were reliably recovered at post-treatment, 63.7% showed reliable improvement and 6.6% showed reliable deterioration. Most patients received treatments that were recommended by NICE. When a treatment not recommended by NICE was provided, recovery rates were reduced. Service characteristics that predicted higher reliable recovery rates were: high average number of therapy sessions; higher step-up rates among individuals who started with low intensity treatment; larger services; and a larger proportion of experienced staff. CONCLUSIONS: Compliance with the IAPT clinical model is associated with enhanced rates of reliable recovery.

Treatment of child anxiety in the context of maternal anxiety disorder: a randomised controlled trial and economic analysis

Background Cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) for childhood anxiety disorders is associated with modest outcomes in the context of parental anxiety disorder. Objectives This study evaluated whether or not the outcome of CBT for children with anxiety disorders in the context of maternal anxiety disorders is improved by the addition of (i) treatment of maternal anxiety disorders, or (ii) treatment focused on maternal responses. The incremental cost-effectiveness of the additional treatments was also evaluated. Design Participants were randomised to receive (i) child cognitive–behavioural therapy (CCBT); (ii) CCBT with CBT to target maternal anxiety disorders [CCBT + maternal cognitive–behavioural therapy (MCBT)]; or (iii) CCBT with an intervention to target mother–child interactions (MCIs) (CCBT + MCI). Setting A NHS university clinic in Berkshire, UK. Participants Two hundred and eleven children with a primary anxiety disorder, whose mothers also had an anxiety disorder. Interventions All families received eight sessions of individual CCBT. Mothers in the CCBT + MCBT arm also received eight sessions of CBT targeting their own anxiety disorders. Mothers in the MCI arm received 10 sessions targeting maternal parenting cognitions and behaviours. Non-specific interventions were delivered to balance groups for therapist contact. Main outcome measures Primary clinical outcomes were the child’s primary anxiety disorder status and degree of improvement at the end of treatment. Follow-up assessments were conducted at 6 and 12 months. Outcomes in the economic analyses were identified and measured using estimated quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). QALYS were combined with treatment, health and social care costs and presented within an incremental cost–utility analysis framework with associated uncertainty. Results MCBT was associated with significant short-term improvement in maternal anxiety; however, after children had received CCBT, group differences were no longer apparent. CCBT + MCI was associated with a reduction in maternal overinvolvement and more confident expectations of the child. However, neither CCBT + MCBT nor CCBT + MCI conferred a significant post-treatment benefit over CCBT in terms of child anxiety disorder diagnoses [adjusted risk ratio (RR) 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87 to 1.62, p = 0.29; adjusted RR CCBT + MCI vs. control: adjusted RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.67, p = 0.20, respectively] or global improvement ratings (adjusted RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.59, p = 0.05; adjusted RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.53, p = 0.13). CCBT + MCI outperformed CCBT on some secondary outcome measures. Furthermore, primary economic analyses suggested that, at commonly accepted thresholds of cost-effectiveness, the probability that CCBT + MCI will be cost-effective in comparison with CCBT (plus non-specific interventions) is about 75%. Conclusions Good outcomes were achieved for children and their mothers across treatment conditions. There was no evidence of a benefit to child outcome of supplementing CCBT with either intervention focusing on maternal anxiety disorder or maternal cognitions and behaviours. However, supplementing CCBT with treatment that targeted maternal cognitions and behaviours represented a cost-effective use of resources, although the high percentage of missing data on some economic variables is a shortcoming. Future work should consider whether or not effects of the adjunct interventions are enhanced in particular contexts. The economic findings highlight the utility of considering the use of a broad range of services when evaluating interventions with this client group. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN19762288. Funding This trial was funded by the Medical Research Council (MRC) and Berkshire Healthcare Foundation Trust and managed by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) on behalf of the MRC–NIHR partnership (09/800/17) and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 38.

Recognition, assessment and treatment of social anxiety disorder: summary of NICE guidance

Social anxiety disorder is one of the most persistent and common of the anxiety disorders, with lifetime prevalence rates in Europe of 6.7% (range 3.9-13.7%).1 It often coexists with depression, substance use disorder, generalised anxiety disorder, panic disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder.2 It can severely impair a person’s daily functioning by impeding the formation of relationships, reducing quality of life, and negatively affecting performance at work or school. Despite this, and the fact that effective treatments exist, only about half of people with this condition seek treatment, many after waiting 10-15 years.3 Although about 40% of those who develop the condition in childhood or adolescence recover before adulthood,4 for many the disorder persists into adulthood, with the chance of spontaneous recovery then limited compared with other mental health problems. This article summarises the most recent recommendations from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) on recognising, assessing, and treating social anxiety disorder in children, young people, and adults.5