Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-hfldf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-31T18:21:39.562Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A pilot study on the effectiveness of low-intensity cognitive behavioural therapy (LiCBT) for common mental disorders in Hong Kong

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 January 2021

Candice L.Y.M. Powell Open the ORCID record for Candice L.Y.M. Powell [Opens in a new window] ,
Alfred Pak-Kwan Lo Open the ORCID record for Alfred Pak-Kwan Lo [Opens in a new window] ,
Gladys T.Y. Yeung ,
Natalie T.Y. Leung ,
Winnie W.S. Mak ,
Suzanne H.W. So ,
Chui-De Chiu ,
Sania S.W. Yau ,
Eugene G. Mullan  and
Patrick W.L. Leung
Candice L.Y.M. Powell
Affiliation:
New Life Psychiatric Rehabilitation Association, Hong Kong, China
Alfred Pak-Kwan Lo
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
Gladys T.Y. Yeung
Affiliation:
New Life Psychiatric Rehabilitation Association, Hong Kong, China
Natalie T.Y. Leung
Affiliation:
New Life Psychiatric Rehabilitation Association, Hong Kong, China
Winnie W.S. Mak
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
Suzanne H.W. So
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
Chui-De Chiu
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
Sania S.W. Yau
Affiliation:
New Life Psychiatric Rehabilitation Association, Hong Kong, China
Eugene G. Mullan
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
Patrick W.L. Leung*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
*
*Corresponding author. Email: pleung@cuhk.edu.hk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background:

To cope with the rising demand for psychological treatment, evidence-based low-intensity cognitive behavioural therapy (LiCBT) delivered by trained para-professionals was introduced internationally.

Aims:

This pilot study aimed at examining the effectiveness of LiCBT in Hong Kong.

Method:

This study was of an uncontrolled pre- and post-treatment design, testing LiCBT at a local community mental health centre in Hong Kong. Two hundred and eighty-five Chinese adult help-seekers to the centre attended two or more sessions of LiCBT delivered by trained para-professionals. These participants also rated their depression and anxiety on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and Generalised Anxiety Disorder Scale-7 (GAD-7), respectively, at pre- and post-treatment.

Results:

Comparison of the pre- and post-treatment PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scores of 285 participants indicated significant improvements in depression and anxiety with large effect sizes (depression: d = 0.87; anxiety: d = 0.95). For those participants reaching the clinical level of either depression and/or anxiety at pre-treatment (n = 229, 80.4%), they reported even larger effect sizes (depression: d = 1.00; anxiety: d = 1.15). The recovery rate was 55.9% with a reliable improvement rate of 63.9%. An average of 5.6 sessions was offered to the participants with each session spanning a mean of 42 minutes. The baseline clinical conditions and participants’ educational level were predictive of post-treatment recovery.

Conclusions:

The results supported the effectiveness and cost-efficiency of LiCBT for depression and anxiety at a Hong Kong community mental health centre. The effect sizes and the recovery and reliable improvement rates achieved were comparable to those reported from countries such as the UK and Australia.

Keywords

anxietyChinesedepressionHong KongIAPTlow-intensity CBT (LiCBT)
Type
Brief Clinical Report
Information
Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy , Volume 49 , Issue 6 , November 2021 , pp. 758 - 763
Copyright
© British Association for Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapies 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

‡

These authors contributed equally as co-first authors to this work.

References

Andrade, L. H., Alonso, J., Mneimneh, Z., Wells, J. E., Al-Hamzawi, A., Borges, G., Bromet, E., Bruffaerts, R., de Girolamo, G., de Graaf, R., Florescu, S., Gureje, O., Hinkov, H. R., Hu, C., Huang, Y., Hwang, I., Jin, R., Karam, E. G., Kovess-Masfety, V., … Kessler, R. C. (2014). Barriers to mental health treatment: results from the WHO World Mental Health surveys. Psychological Medicine, 44, 1303–1317. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291713001943 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baigent, M., Smith, D., Battersby, M., Lawn, S., Redpath, P., & McCoy, A. (2020). The Australian version of IAPT: clinical outcomes of the multi-site cohort study of NewAccess. Journal of Mental Health. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638237.2020.1760224 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, S. W. Y., & Adams, M. (2014). Service use, drop-out rate and clinical outcomes: a comparison between high and low intensity treatments in an IAPT service. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 42, 747–759. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1352465813000544 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, D. M. (2018). Realizing the mass public benefit of evidence-based psychological therapies: the IAPT program. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 14, 159–183. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050817-084833 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clark, D. M., Layard, R., Smithies, R., Richards, D. A., Suckling, R., & Wright, B. (2009). Improving access to psychological therapy: initial evaluation of two UK demonstration sites. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 47, 910–920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2009.07.010 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Griffiths, C. A., & Griffiths, L. J. (2015). Recovery and reliable change rates for patients scoring severe on depression, anxiety or impaired functioning in a psychological therapies service: IAPT. Mental Health Review Journal, 20, 28–35. https://doi.org/10.1108/MHRJ-06-2014-0022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.