Low-intensity psychological interventions are effective for children and young people (CYP) with mental health difficulties and can help bridge the demand–capacity gap. Despite increasing awareness, training and use of low-intensity psychological interventions, it is not yet understood what is being implemented in clinical practice in the UK and the associated evidence base.

This paper presents two studies; first, a national survey (n=102) of practitioners to identify low-intensity psychological interventions currently delivered in practice and second, an exploration of the availability and the strength of empirical support (characterised as ‘gold’, ‘silver’ and ‘bronze’) of low-intensity CBT interventions for CYP.

The first study found a wide variety of interventions being used across different services; 101/102 respondents reported using routine outcome measures. The second study identified 44 different low-intensity interventions, 28 of which were rated as having gold empirical support. However, only 13 of the gold interventions were considered accessible for practitioners and only two were reported being used in routine practice.

These findings highlight that these interventions have been developed and empirically tested, but many are not easily accessible, highlighting the ‘research–practice’ gap in the provision of low-intensity interventions. There is a need for an increase in standardisation of care and accessibility of gold interventions. This paper hopes to begin the process of creating a hub of low-intensity interventions that are accessible and empirically supported to improve equity of access and outcomes of low-intensity psychological interventions for CYP.

Despite the importance of routinely assessing the outcomes of everyday practice, few studies have reported outcome metrics for child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS).

Our aim is to investigate reliable change and recovery rates for treatment as usual, provided by one community CAMHS over two time periods.

We prospectively audited accepted consecutive referrals from November 2017 to January 2018, and April to September 2019. Cases with paired outcomes were identified, and reliable change and recovery rates were calculated.

Baseline outcome data were obtained for 672 (78.2%) and 744 (77.5%) young people in 2018 and 2019, respectively. Of eligible participants, 174 (59.2%) and 155 (45.7%) completed at least one follow-up outcome measure in 2018 and 2019, respectively. Pre- and post-test scores on the Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale (RCADS) and Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) showed a reduction in symptoms. Total RCADS scores showed 21–25% of participants reliably improved, with 44–49% showing reliable improvement on one or more subscale. On the SDQ, 11 (15.5%) and 19 (25.3%) participants reported reliable improvement on at least one subscale in 2018 and 2019, respectively. Reliable recovery rates ranged from 48 to 51% for youth-completed and 40 to 42% for parent-completed RCADS.

Half of young people receiving treatment as usual from CAMHS reliably improved on at least one routine outcome measure subscale, improvement rates comparable with adult psychological therapies services. Our findings indicate that reliable change and recovery on subscale rather than total scores may be a better indication of outcomes.