Pragmatic randomised controlled trial of guided self-help versus individual cognitive behavioural therapy with a trauma focus for post-traumatic stress disorder (RAPID).

Background: Guided self-help has been shown to be effective for other mental conditions and, if effective for post-traumatic stress disorder, would offer a time-efficient and accessible treatment option, with the potential to reduce waiting times and costs.

Objective: To determine if trauma-focused guided self-help is non-inferior to individual, face-to-face cognitive-behavioural therapy with a trauma focus for mild to moderate post-traumatic stress disorder to a single traumatic event.

Design: Multicentre pragmatic randomised controlled non-inferiority trial with economic evaluation to determine cost-effectiveness and nested process evaluation to assess fidelity and adherence, dose and factors that influence outcome (including context, acceptability, facilitators and barriers, measured qualitatively). Participants were randomised in a 1 : 1 ratio. The primary analysis was intention to treat using multilevel analysis of covariance.

Setting: Primary and secondary mental health settings across the United Kingdom's National Health Service.

Participants: One hundred and ninety-six adults with a primary diagnosis of mild to moderate post-traumatic stress disorder were randomised with 82% retention at 16 weeks and 71% at 52 weeks. Nineteen participants and ten therapists were interviewed for the process evaluation.

Interventions: Up to 12 face-to-face, manualised, individual cognitive-behavioural therapy with a trauma focus sessions, each lasting 60-90 minutes, or to guided self-help using , an eight-step online guided self-help programme based on cognitive-behavioural therapy with a trauma focus, with up to five face-to-face meetings of up to 3 hours in total and four brief telephone calls or e-mail contacts between sessions.

Main Outcome Measures: Primary outcome: the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for , Fifth Edition, at 16 weeks post-randomisation. Secondary outcomes: included severity of post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms at 52 weeks, and functioning, symptoms of depression, symptoms of anxiety, alcohol use and perceived social support at both 16 and 52 weeks post-randomisation. Those assessing outcomes were blinded to group assignment.

Results: Non-inferiority was demonstrated at the primary end point of 16 weeks on the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for , Fifth Edition [mean difference 1.01 (one-sided 95% CI -∞ to 3.90, non-inferiority  = 0.012)]. Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for , Fifth Edition, score improvements of over 60% in both groups were maintained at 52 weeks but the non-inferiority results were inconclusive in favour of cognitive-behavioural therapy with a trauma focus at this timepoint [mean difference 3.20 (one-sided 95% confidence interval -∞ to 6.00, non-inferiority  = 0.15)]. Guided self-help using was not shown to be more cost-effective than face-to-face cognitive-behavioural therapy with a trauma focus although there was no significant difference in accruing quality-adjusted life-years, incremental quality-adjusted life-years -0.04 (95% confidence interval -0.10 to 0.01) and guided self-help using was significantly cheaper to deliver [£277 (95% confidence interval £253 to £301) vs. £729 (95% CI £671 to £788)]. Guided self-help using appeared to be acceptable and well tolerated by participants. No important adverse events or side effects were identified.

Limitations: The results are not generalisable to people with post-traumatic stress disorder to more than one traumatic event.

Conclusions: Guided self-help using for mild to moderate post-traumatic stress disorder to a single traumatic event appears to be non-inferior to individual face-to-face cognitive-behavioural therapy with a trauma focus and the results suggest it should be considered a first-line treatment for people with this condition.

Future Work: Work is now needed to determine how best to effectively disseminate and implement guided self-help using at scale.

Trial Registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN13697710.

Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 14/192/97) and is published in full in ; Vol. 27, No. 26. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.