The British journal of clinical psychology · 2026
A service evaluation of 'IDEAS' - Modular treatment for youth with complex emotional needs.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Harding Annabel, Orsucci Franco, Baines Joanna
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: There is a crucial need for an evidence-based intervention for young people presenting with moderate complex emotional needs (CEN). UK CEN care has been described as variable and poor quality, with its improvement a UK policy priority. Briefer-versions of full-programme therapy packages utilizing stepped-care models offer a clear and contained pathway for this population, though their current availability in services is scarce. This service evaluation aims to evaluate the efficacy of 'IDEAS' as a piloted brief psychological intervention for young people aged 16-25 presenting with moderate CEN.
METHOD: A pre-test/post-test design was used to explore clinical outcomes for participants and services via paired sample t-tests, mixed-model ANOVAS and frequency statistics.
RESULTS: Exploratory pre/post-intervention analyses revealed significant reductions in mean scores for the severity of borderline personality disorder symptoms (d = .83), emotion regulation (d = 1.15) and overall wellbeing (reflecting improvement; d = .97) and increases in mean scores for quality of life (d = -.67), including level of satisfaction in one's quality of life and of therapeutic treatment received (d = -.65). These outcomes were maintained at 3-month follow-up, were little influenced by clinician training and supported readiness for discharge post-intervention for more (68.65%) participants.
CONCLUSIONS: The current evaluation provides preliminary evidence that IDEAS may offer a feasible, lower-cost alternative to full-programme treatment packages, with benefits for young people, services and Trusts. Given this evaluation of IDEAS being from a small, uncontrolled pilot, the findings are exploratory. Further evaluation is therefore warranted upon its larger-scale implementation.
METHOD: A pre-test/post-test design was used to explore clinical outcomes for participants and services via paired sample t-tests, mixed-model ANOVAS and frequency statistics.
RESULTS: Exploratory pre/post-intervention analyses revealed significant reductions in mean scores for the severity of borderline personality disorder symptoms (d = .83), emotion regulation (d = 1.15) and overall wellbeing (reflecting improvement; d = .97) and increases in mean scores for quality of life (d = -.67), including level of satisfaction in one's quality of life and of therapeutic treatment received (d = -.65). These outcomes were maintained at 3-month follow-up, were little influenced by clinician training and supported readiness for discharge post-intervention for more (68.65%) participants.
CONCLUSIONS: The current evaluation provides preliminary evidence that IDEAS may offer a feasible, lower-cost alternative to full-programme treatment packages, with benefits for young people, services and Trusts. Given this evaluation of IDEAS being from a small, uncontrolled pilot, the findings are exploratory. Further evaluation is therefore warranted upon its larger-scale implementation.