MAPLES Pilot Study for Low Mood in ABI
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Mood, Activity Participation, and Leisure Engagement Satisfaction (MAPLES): A Pilot Feasibility Study for Low Mood in Acquired Brain Injury.
IRAS ID
244647
Contact name
Andrea Kusec
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
University of Cambridge
Duration of Study in the UK
3 years, 0 months, 0 days
Research summary
Low mood/depression occurs at significantly elevated rate following acquired brain injury (ABI). Unfortunately we lack a good evidence-base for helpful interventions in this group. Cognitive Behavioural Therapy, for example, appears to be less effective following ABI because of the heavy demands it places on memory, mental flexibility, and comprehension. Behavioural Activation (BA), which places much lower demands on these abilities, is a promising alternative. Depression leads to reduced participation in potentially enjoyable activities – people may have difficulty anticipating positive experiences, avoid situations through fear of negative outcomes, find it hard to plan or initiate activities etc. This situation is likely to be exacerbated after ABI where physical and cognitive problems can present additional barriers. The central tenet of BA, which has established efficacy in reducing depression in the general population, is that this lack of positive reinforcement creates a cycle that perpetuates low mood. Put simply, it aims to reverse this by helping individuals to schedule and engage in activities. Here we seek to examine the feasibility and acceptability of a BA group for adults with ABI recruited via Cambridgeshire Community Services (CCS). Potential Efficacy will be assessed on mood and activity participation measures. To help distinguish benefits attributable to BA from those that may simply accrue through attending regular group meetings, participants will be randomly allocated to BA or a social "placebo" group of identical duration. The practical logistics of the study mean that some participants will have to wait for some time before joining a group. This allows us to create a ‘treatment as usual’ control for the relative efficacy of both groups by repeating the outcome measures before and after this ‘waitlist’ period, before these participants take up their group places.
REC name
East of England - Cambridge Central Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
18/EE/0305
Date of REC Opinion
19 Nov 2018
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion