Working with service-users to develop a mood as input based intervention for worry

1. Working with service-users to develop a mood as input based intervention for worry Fergal Jones , Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust & Canterbury Christ Church University Ruth Chandler, Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust Graham Davey, University of Sussex

2. Contents • Overview of project • Benefits of collaboration for university • And for Trust • Value of service-user involvement

3. Context • The evidence base that Graham and his lab have developed to support a mood-as-input model of worrying • There’s room for GAD interventions to be more effective and efficient • SPFT made available own account funding

4. Mood as input theory • Perseveration determined by interaction between stop-rules and mood • Perfectionistic ‘as many as can’ stop-rules + negative mood = perseveration • In effect: ‘I must continue to worry until I feel I have satisfactorily resolved this problem’

5. Intervention possibilities • Increased awareness of this process, providing more choice • Evaluating helpfulness of stop-rules and developing more helpful ones • Postponing thinking about something until mood lifts

6. Research Stage 1: Aims • To gain an initial indication of the viability and acceptability of the components • To work with service-users to refine and develop the components • If they seem viable, to develop an intervention (or part of an intervention) to be researched further • Therefore: consulting with service-users re these intervention components

7. Research Stage 1: Method • Participants: service-users troubled by worry, who have already received some intervention • Design: eight 2-hour focus groups, including components and feedback • Individual interviews at end • Qualitative and single case quantitative analysis • Recruitment completed -first group in April

8. Benefits for University • Access to service-user consultants and participants • Trust skilled in service-user consultation • Access to clinicians • Clinical relevance • Access to funding (e.g. RfPB)

9. Benefits for Trust • Access to up to date knowledge of evidence and theory base • Involvement with cutting edge research • Access to high quality research skills • Time and resource; e.g. masters students • Credibility for funding applications

10. Value of user involvement • Likely to improve clinical and service-user relevance • Likely to improve viability • Can strengthen funding applications • Value of a good fit • The Trust is building a strong team and process re involvement.