Examining the effectiveness of the Better Access initiative using data from real-world practice settings

This study examined the effectiveness of the Better Access initiative using outcome data from real-world practice settings.

We used anonymised data from four datasets to assess outcomes for consumers over 86,121 episodes of care. The datasets contained routinely captured episode-level data from the practices of psychologists and other eligible Better Access providers. Across the datasets, outcomes were assessed on 11 different measures (mostly consumer-rated measures of depression and anxiety symptoms, psychological distress, functioning and wellbeing). We conducted purpose-designed analyses with three of the datasets (83,346 episodes), examining score changes on given measures between the first and last assessment occasion within an episode. We used preexisting outputs for the fourth dataset (2775 episodes), again considering change from the beginning to the end of the episode.

In the purpose-designed analyses, consumers' mental health improved in around 50-60% of episodes. However, consumers showed no change or experienced deterioration in their mental health in 20-30% and 10-20% of episodes, respectively. Those with more severe baseline scores had a greater probability of showing improvement. The preexisting outputs also identified significant improvements, particularly in episodes where treatment was complete.

Better Access is achieving reductions in symptoms and improvements in functioning and wellbeing for the majority of consumers. A minority of consumers do not have these sorts of positive outcomes, however, and further work is required to understand why. Routine measurement of outcomes - particularly consumer-rated outcomes - would enable ongoing monitoring of the extent to which Better Access is achieving its goals.