Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) - The Need for Radical Reform, 2018, Scott

Sly Saint said:
I think they (BBC) have completely missed the point and are making out that, largely due to lack of funding, some areas are not reaching targets for access to therapy.
From what I have read before (Marks and Scott), the main issue is the poor recovery rate and bad 'value for money'.
Click to expand...
The direction ofvtravel has been signposted by research funding. CBT has had so much money it must offer some bang for the bucks
Check out @Keith_Laws’s Tweet:
 
IAPT Haemorrhaging Clients

"
IAPT in its’ pilot projects is expanding ‘IAPT care’ into the medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) field (see link below).

Despite the concept of MUS being jettisoned from DSM-5 [American Psychiatric Association (2013)] – in a radical departure from its’ predecessor DSM IV it cautions that it cannot be assumed that just because no physical explanation is proferred the problem must be psychological.

Nevertheless IAPT in its report on integrated services comes up with an ‘MUS recovery rate’!

https://www.dropbox.com/s/f1taewasjrg4pyw/IAPT MUS Aug 2018.pdf?dl=0

"
http://www.cbtwatch.com/iapt-haemorrhaging-clients/
 
What If IAPT Had Never Happened?
Ten years on from the inception of the Improving Access to Psychological Therapies Service (IAPT), it is important to review what would have happened but for IAPT.

Using this comparison (what economists term the appropriate counterfactual), it is far from clear that IAPT has conferred any advantage and it is extremely doubtfuI whether the £1.3 billion spent on it has been worthwhile.

Perhaps in the New Year IAPT should be renamed Impoverished Access to Psychological Therapies!

More about this anon.
Click to expand...

http://www.cbtwatch.com/what-if-iapt-had-never-happened/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom