Access to best‐evidenced mental health support for care‐experienced young people: Learnings from the implementation of cognitive therapy for PTSD.
Saved in:
| Title: | Access to best‐evidenced mental health support for care‐experienced young people: Learnings from the implementation of cognitive therapy for PTSD. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | McGuire, Rosie, Meiser‐Stedman, Richard, Smith, Patrick, Schmidt, Davin, Bjornstad, Gretchen, Bosworth, Robyn, Clarke, Timothy, Coombes, Joe, Geijer Simpson, Emma, Hudson, Kristian, Oliveira, Paula, Macleod, John, McGovern, Ruth, Stallard, Paul, Wood, Katie, Hiller, Rachel M. |
| Source: | British Journal of Clinical Psychology. Mar2025, Vol. 64 Issue 1, p63-85. 23p. |
| Subjects: | Treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder, Health services accessibility, Child welfare, Mental health services, Human services programs, Research funding, Qualitative research, Social services, Medical care, Quantitative research, Cognitive therapy, Social support, Adults |
| Geographic Terms: | England |
| Abstract: | Objectives: Rates of PTSD are up to 12 times higher in care‐experienced young people (CEYP) compared to their peers. Trauma‐focused CBTs (tf‐CBT) are the best‐evidenced treatment for youth with PTSD, yet, in practice, CEYP often struggle to access this treatment. We worked alongside services to understand barriers and facilitators of the implementation of cognitive therapy for PTSD (a type of tf‐CBT) to CEYP. Design: This was an active, open implementation trial. Methods: We recruited 28 mental health teams across England, including general CAMHS, targeted CAMHS for CEYP and social care‐based teams. From these teams, participants were 243 mental health professionals, from a wide variety of professional backgrounds. Following recruitment/intervention training, teams participated in rolling three monthly focus groups and individual interviews, to understand what helped and hindered implementation. Data were analysed using a framework analysis conducted using CFIR 2.0. Results: Almost half of the teams were able to implement, but only approximately one quarter with CEYP, specifically. Universal barriers that were discussed by almost all teams particularly highlighted service structures and poor resourcing as major barriers to delivery to CEYP, as well as the complexities of the young person and their network. Unique factors that differentiated teams who did and did not implement included commissioning practices, the culture of the team, leadership engagement and style, and the development of supervision structures. Conclusions: Findings offer key considerations for mental health teams, service leads, commissioners and policy‐makers to enhance delivery of best‐evidenced mental health treatments like CT‐PTSD, for CEYP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of British Journal of Clinical Psychology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Objectives: Rates of PTSD are up to 12 times higher in care‐experienced young people (CEYP) compared to their peers. Trauma‐focused CBTs (tf‐CBT) are the best‐evidenced treatment for youth with PTSD, yet, in practice, CEYP often struggle to access this treatment. We worked alongside services to understand barriers and facilitators of the implementation of cognitive therapy for PTSD (a type of tf‐CBT) to CEYP. Design: This was an active, open implementation trial. Methods: We recruited 28 mental health teams across England, including general CAMHS, targeted CAMHS for CEYP and social care‐based teams. From these teams, participants were 243 mental health professionals, from a wide variety of professional backgrounds. Following recruitment/intervention training, teams participated in rolling three monthly focus groups and individual interviews, to understand what helped and hindered implementation. Data were analysed using a framework analysis conducted using CFIR 2.0. Results: Almost half of the teams were able to implement, but only approximately one quarter with CEYP, specifically. Universal barriers that were discussed by almost all teams particularly highlighted service structures and poor resourcing as major barriers to delivery to CEYP, as well as the complexities of the young person and their network. Unique factors that differentiated teams who did and did not implement included commissioning practices, the culture of the team, leadership engagement and style, and the development of supervision structures. Conclusions: Findings offer key considerations for mental health teams, service leads, commissioners and policy‐makers to enhance delivery of best‐evidenced mental health treatments like CT‐PTSD, for CEYP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 01446657 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/bjc.12471 |
