Evaluation of a Conversational Information Collection Tool to Access Talk Therapy

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
This is an observational study evaluating a conversational information collection tool to access talk therapy. The patient outcome data will be compared between people who refer to talk therapy via the conversational information collection tool and people who refer using other means.

Official Title
-----------------
Evaluation of a Conversational Information Collection Tool to Access Talk Therapy

Conditions
-----------------
Mental Health Issue

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Device: Conversational Information Collection Tool


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Participant meets minimum age requirements for the talk therapy service Participant's registered GP is within the talk therapy service's CCG catchment area Exclusion Criteria: Participants who are in crisis (defined by requiring urgent care or being at an urgent risk of harm)

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 16 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Conversational Information Collection Tool Referrals<br>These are patients who refer to talk therapy using the novel information collection tool. | Device: Conversational Information Collection Tool<br>* Conversational Information Collection Tool that facilitates the self-referral to talk therapy.<br>|
| Other Referrals<br>These are patients who refer to talk therapy using other referral methods. | |

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Change from baseline depression score to after treatment | The primary outcome will be defined as reliable and clinically significant improvement in clinical scores after treatment. Hereby, the investigators will test for changes in depression scores using Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9: posttreatment scores <10 and improved by ≥6 points). PHQ-9 includes 9 questions scored between 0 and 3, with higher scores indicating more severe depression. | The definition of reliable and clinically significant improvement is based on a comparison of pre-treatment (at time of referral, on the day of consenting) and post-treatment (assessed at point of discharge, an average of 5 months) clinical score. | 
| Change from baseline anxiety score to after treatment | The primary outcome will be defined as reliable and clinically significant improvement in clinical scores after treatment. Hereby, we will test for changes in anxiety scores using Generalised Anxiety Disorder Assessment (GAD-7: posttreatment scores <8 and improved by ≥4 points).GAD-7 includes 7 questions scored between 0 and 3, with higher scores indicating more severe anxiety. | The definition of reliable and clinically significant improvement is based on a comparison of pre-treatment (at time of referral, on the day of consenting) and post-treatment (assessed at point of discharge, an average of 5 months) clinical score | 
| Clinical assessment times | Improved clinical efficiency will be indicated by reduced assessment times, measured by the average time per clinical assessment (in minutes). | This measure will be available after the clinical assessment (up to average of 1 month from consenting). | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Waiting times | Patient waiting times for treatment will be measured as the time between the date of (self-referral) and the date of the clinical assessment. | This measure will be available after the clinical assessment (up to average of 1 month from consenting). | 
| Referral Dropout Rates | Patient referral dropout will be measured as any individual who consented to participate in the study, but did not complete all requested clinical information during the referral process. | During Information Collection Tool interaction (day 1) | 
| Assessment Dropout Rates | Clinical assessment dropout will be measured as any cancellation or Did Not Attend event for patients who successfully had a clinical assessment slot (eg. time and date) organised. The treatment cohort (Limbic Access with AI pathway) will be evaluated against a cohort of patients going through limbic Access' standard pathway across the same services and over the same time window as the study will be used for comparison. | At time point of treatment termination using standard IAPT definitions (assessed up to 3 months) | 
| Treatment Dropout Rates | Treatment dropout will be measured using a dropout label which is added to a patient's file in the service's patient management system by the treating clinician when a dropout event occurs. The treatment cohort (Limbic Access +AI pathway) will be evaluated against a cohort of patients going through limbic Access' standard pathway across the same services and over the same time window as the study will be used for comparison. | At time point of treatment termination using standard IAPT definitions (assessed up to 3 months) |