Cited by 9Digital Mental Health InterventionsMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation

Therapists’ perceptions and acceptability of providing internet-delivered guided self-help acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) for family carers of people with dementia (iACT4CARERS): a qualitative study

Open access
Contreras, Milena, Van Hout, Elien, Farquhar, Morag, Gould, Rebecca L., McCracken, Lance M., Hornberger, Michael, Richmond, Erica, Kishita, Naoko·2021·The Cognitive Behaviour Therapist

Abstract

This study aimed to explore therapists’ perceptions and acceptability of providing internet-delivered, therapist-guided, self-help acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) for family carers of people with dementia (iACT4CARERS). To achieve this, a qualitative approach with semi-structured interviews was employed with eight novice therapists recruited from primary and secondary care services taking part in a feasibility study of iACT4CARERS. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analysed using thematic analysis. Four over-arching themes were identified: (1) positive attitudes towards the intervention, (2) therapists’ workload, (3) therapists’ confidence to perform their role, and (4) connecting with family carers in a virtual context. Theme 1 included seeing their involvement as an opportunity for personal growth and perceiving benefits to the family carers, which contributed to greater acceptability. Theme 2 reflected that while workload and the user-friendliness of the online platform were highly acceptable among the therapists, there were also time-consuming cases that increased therapists’ burden. Theme 3 revealed that practical resources provided during the training, continued supervision, and opportunities to learn from other therapists, increased therapist confidence and facilitated greater acceptability. Finally, Theme 4 highlighted that improving the connection between therapists and carers was critical in a virtual context and strategies to improve the therapist–carer relationship were recommended. The implementation of iACT4CARERS was largely acceptable for the therapists involved in the trial. Ways to strengthen the therapeutic relationship in the virtual context and practical strategies to deal with common problems may enhance therapist experience and delivery in a full-scale effectiveness trial. Key learning aims: (1) To understand which factors facilitated therapists’ positive perceptions and acceptability of providing internet-delivered guided self-help ACT (iACT4CARERS). (2) To understand what challenges acted as barriers to therapists’ positive perceptions and acceptability of providing iACT4CARERS. (3) To learn what aspects of the training and the intervention can be refined to improve the acceptability to therapists in trials involving internet-delivered guided self-help interventions for family carers.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1754470x21000337

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 44 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Contreras, M., Van Hout, E., Farquhar, M., Gould, R. L., McCracken, L. M., Hornberger, M., Richmond, E., & Kishita, N.
Affiliations
  • University of East Anglia (GB)
  • University College London (GB)
  • Uppsala University (SE)
  • Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
Corresponding author
Kishita, Naoko
Venue
The Cognitive Behaviour Therapist
Published
2021
Volume
14
ISSN
1754-470X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3208977880
Cited by
9
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2
FWCI
1.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Cognitive Behaviour Therapist (publishedVersion)
  • UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (PB-PG-0418-20001)
  • Department of Health and Social Care
  • Research for Patient Benefit Programme
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Keywords
acceptance and commitment therapy, online therapy, guided self-help, family caregivers, dementia, therapist perspectives, acceptability, therapist workload, therapist confidence, virtual connections, therapist training and supervision

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review