UK: Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) articles, blogs and discussion

I've heard the number £4bn for IAPTS - is it just the LTC part (?) since it started/over how long (?)

To put that into perspective I'm seeing figures of £180Bn for the entire NHS for a year, estimates of £350m for a new hospital etc. There is the following Times article from this year noting that poor housing costs the NHS £1.4Bn a year, well I wonder what fixing the housing from being damp etc would cost instead of IAPT assuming its people's perception and coping mechanisms: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/how-bad-homes-cost-nhs-1-4bn-times-health-commission-08zpsdpvn

"The health service spends £383 million a year treating homeowners with illnesses related to cold living conditions.

Yet, the BRE estimates that for less than £1,000 40 per cent of all poor housing that is owned outright or with a mortgage could be remedied and the NHS would start to save money in about seven years."

Well what does it cost the NHS each time someone is referred to IAPT, whether they complete 'treatment' ie 'two sessions' or not, and what is the 'complete treament' actually sold on (are people kidding themselves there are 6-10 sessions that might do some good people are mostly attending so it sounds more feasible as being help?)

 

2021

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...0TC1TalNTYDBkykNCvDDH9RqA4z3PrhvtmdnqS7tP1_GY


'NHS mental health therapists pressurised to exaggerate success rates, expert claims'

‘Actual human experience was secondary to creating data that would shore up the evidence base for the model to guarantee further investment,’ says one


'IAPT has been exaggerating success rates to get yet more research funding.

'NHS mental health therapists pressurised to exaggerate success rates, expert claims'

‘Actual human experience was secondary to creating data that would shore up the evidence base for the model to guarantee further investment,’ says one'

'The provision of psychological treatment on the NHS has undergone an “Uberisation”, in which counsellors are pressurised to exaggerate their success in treating patients, a conference has heard.

Elizabeth Cotton, of Cardiff Metropolitan University, an expert in mental health at work, said that more than four in 10 – 41 per cent – of therapists working for the NHS’s talking treatments programme had been asked to manipulate data about patients’ progress'


' ... Dr Cotton, an adult psychotherapist who has written a book on working in health and social care, says the pressure on therapists was such that some had been encouraged by their managers to coach patients to give positive answers to questionnaires.

Patients were urged to repeat the questionnaires until a positive response was obtained, she told the British Sociological Association conference on work.

Where patients discharged themselves without notifying the NHS, the therapist was encouraged to fill in data sheets on their behalf to reflect a positive outcome, said Dr Cotton.'


'....
Dr Cotton carried out four surveys between 2016 and 2020. One, of 1,500 therapists working for the NHS or privately, found that more than a third - 38 per cent - had raised concerns about patient care, a figure rising to 58 per cent among the 223 currently employed by IAPT.

In another survey of 650 IAPT employees, carried out in 2019, 41 per cent said they had been asked to manipulate data.

One therapist had reportedly been advised by their manager that “I could complete forms on behalf of clients to get the best results”.

Another said: “Actual human experience was secondary to creating data which would shore up the evidence base for the model to justify the economic argument and guarantee further investment.

“The whole system represents a big self-reinforcing loop relating to success in terms that had been self-defined by the system.”
.

Dr Cotton warned the downgrading of therapy “into a standardised, manualised, and now digital model” had “opened up the doors for the ending of highly experienced clinical work in the public sector”.

 

If thousands are off work with mental health issues, why is it that so many people are ditching therapy?

If thousands are off work with mental health issues, why is it that so many people are ditching therapy? (msn.com)

 

I've looked it up and it seems the two people behind IAPT were:

David M. Clark - Wikipedia

Richard Layard, Baron Layard - Wikipedia

So the point made somewhere by someone about psychology having been invaded by economics and its methods seems entirely relevant.

 

So many of those numbers don't add up. And the insistence that 50% make a full recovery, which was the initial target, when there is no way to even pretend that the therapies have anything to do with any meaningful recovery.

Who could have known that falsely reattributing health problems as psychological problems, then offering completely BS McTreatments wouldn't work? It's so reminiscent of societies that decided to invest everything they have in some BS woowoo instead of listening to the people who understood the problem.

If someone were interested in making a splash, doing an investigative report on this would be explosive. The more you peel away at it the worse it looks. This whole thing is a giant scam from top to bottom.

 

Looking at the Hansard notes from 2002/3 I’ve seen they bite the cost of me/cfs to be huge but the cost due to consultations for proper diagnosis and care by GPs /medical to have been £900 per head.

CBT MUS nonsense I think I’ve seen quotes upwards of £1700 including in old Nice type cost effectiveness ‘calculations’ yeah ‘cheap at any cost’ not.. and that as before their ‘treatment’ actually became asymptotic on cost because on the ‘is it effective for me/cfs or long term health’ becomes at least zero perhaps negative is harm when you update based on the reanss as lysis when they were finally forced to release the raw data on PACE it was all based on

no wonder these individuals won’t to keep claiming black us shits and PACE hasn’t been more than debunked

£350million (in my comment above at top of this page) is I think I’ve seen in the King's Fund figures nearly the price of a new entire hospital .

Iapt had none of these infrastructure or equipment ‘assets’ as well as costs from this number. The staff aren’t needing to include expensive highly qualified consultants or pathology labs or radiology running theatres, chemo, A&E etc

given MUS is just a cover-up for me/cfs and round up £900 to £1k x say 300,000 people - which is how many have it not the ‘year of diagnosis’ but even if they all had that in a year that’s just £300m - or £510 if you are going by the £1.7k force feeding them all CBT courses.

If these figures are right well that’s a new hospital , and it still doesn’t scratch the surface of £22nd even if you’d forced all me/cfs into this in one year.

so where is the £1.5-1.7bn being spent that couldn’t even be going on gaslighting me/cfs patients? Not that even the tiny proportion diagnosed that year snd sent on it generally found it useful enough they did more than 2sessions, I guess they might have taken the money gif the full course. But these figures start to not add up?

cheap at any cost?

my comment above reminded me that BRE stated that for less than £1000 a pop 40% of poor quality housing that is owned or mortgaged could be remedied saying the nhs on costs within 7yrs. That’s less than a course of iapt costs to cope with trying to battle to get it fixed.

they aren’t even making sure those misdiagnosed with something that could be cured with iron tablets costing a few pounds or who another serious condition which significantly cheaper to treat snd recoverable fully from is being checked for instead of the sending there with MUS labelling causing that ‘miss’ etc

someone needs their ‘behaviour’ looking at but it’s not those patients but the ones doing it to them then whistling as if it’s big their outcomes when years down the line that stuff and additional cost that path has added unnumeccesarily ti overall taxpayer bill and their lives crops up.

I struggle to see the good that was sold at all

A letter for adjustments to an employer from a GP or OT to instead stop someone declining and thereby save their lifetime working life costs a fraction of all that.