CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03945994Updated May 10, 2019

Connecting People Implementation Study

An interventional study of Connecting People Intervention in Social Isolation, Mental Health Wellness 1 and Social Interaction, sponsored by University of York. Completed at 1 site in United Kingdom. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 70 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2019-05-10.

Sponsored by University of York · Not applicable, Interventional, and Prevention

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
151
Allocation
Non-randomized
Ages
18 Years to 70 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This study aims to investigate if the Connecting People (CP) Programme can be implemented by social care practitioners with high fidelity in community mental health teams (CMHTs) and improve the resourcefulness of social networks of people with mental health problems.

Read the detailed description

People with mental health problems require a range of support to help them in their recovery. Alongside medical and psychological support, people may need support with engaging in meaningful activities and developing relationships. The focus of this study is on advancing understanding of how services can improve the support they offer to people around social relationships.

In a previous study, a Connecting People programme was developed which supported people to make plans for developing their network of contacts in the community. When delivered fully, it helped people feel more included in society and better able to access advice, information and practical support from people they know.

This research project aims to look at how Connecting People can be effectively established within community mental health teams by social workers trained as part of the 'Think Ahead' initiative. The investigators want to know how to implement the Connecting People programme well, assessing whether tools such as manuals, guidance and specific training help or hinder this process. The investigators want to know when implemented, compared to standard care, whether the programme benefits mental health service users and is cost-effective.

The study will last 15 months and is organised into two phrases:

  1. Implementation of the programme in community mental health teams in five areas in England. Outcome data will be collected from each participating team and results will be compared between teams who implemented the programme and those that only offered standard care.
  2. Exploration of how successful implementation was across the five areas, using a check-list and in-depth individual and group interviews to understand the features that supported or hindered the process.
02

Conditions studied

  • Social Isolation
  • Mental Health Wellness 1
  • Social Interaction

Keywords

  • Improve Social Capital
  • Improve mental health
03

In context

Lead sponsor

University of York is the lead sponsor of 11 studies on the registry; none are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 70 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Adults with mental health problems under CMHTs

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Children
  • Adults with mental health problems who are not under CMHTs
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Prevention
Allocation
Non-randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Double (Participant, Care provider)
Enrollment
151 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • No intervention
    Connecting People Control Group

    CMHTs (Community Mental Health Teams) will continue to support people with mental health problems using their standard care.

  • Experimental
    Connecting People Intervention Group

    CMHTs will receive training on how to implement Connecting People programme. They will receive implementation toolkit to improve their practice in contrast to standard care.

    Other: Connecting People Intervention

Interventions

  • OtherConnecting People Intervention

    Improve the resourcefulness of social networks of people with mental health problems

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Resource Generator-UK (RG-UK)

    Questionnaire; Measure of access to social capital (knowing people with particular skills or resources within your social network). The name of the scale is the Resource Generator-UK. Example questions include: Do you currently have access to someone who is able to lend you a small amount of money? Do you currently have access to someone who works for the local authority? Answers are 'Yes' or 'No'; though further information is obtained on the relation of the person to the individual. Scale has 27 items and is scored 0-27 with high scores indicating high access to social capital.

    Time frame: 6 months

Secondary outcomes

  1. Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS)

    Questionnaire; GAS is a method of scoring the extent to which service users' individual goals are achieved in the course of intervention. In effect, each service user has their own outcome measure but this is scored in a standardised way as to allow statistical analysis. The name of the scale is the Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS). Importance from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very important). Difficulty: from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very difficult).

    Time frame: 6 months

  2. Questionnaire about the process of recovery (QPR)

    Questionnaire; Measurement of people's perception of their recovery from mental health problems. Items include, for example, 'I feel better abut myself', 'I feel that my life has a purpose'. The scale has 15 items which are answered using a 5-point likert scale from 'strongly disagree' to 'strongly agree'. Responses are scored 1-5 and summed, with totals from 15-75. Higher values represent a better recovery.

    Time frame: 6 months

  3. EQ-5D-5L

    Questionnaire measurement of health related quality of life. The first part comprises five dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 levels: no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems and extreme problems and the participant is asked to select the most appropriate for them. The digits for the five dimensions are combined into a 5-digit number that describes the participant's health state. High numbers indicate poor health-related quality of life. The second part records the participant's self-rated health on a vertical visual analogue scale (VAS), where the endpoints are labelled 'The best health you can imagine' and 'The worst health you can imagine'. The VAS can be used as a quantitative measure of health outcome that reflect the participant's own judgement from 0-100. High scores indicate better self-rated health.

    Time frame: 6 months

  4. The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS)

    Questionnaire measurement of mental well-being. The scale includes 14 items such as 'I've been feeling optimistic about the future'. 'I've been feeling relaxed', 'I've been feeling confident'. Each item is answered using a 5-point likert scale from 'none of the time' to 'all of the time', with values of 1-5 ascribed to each response. The scale is a sum of item values ranging from 15 to 70 with higher values indicating higher mental well-being

    Time frame: 6 months

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Tees, Esk And Wear Valley NHS Foundation Trust
    Durham, DL2 2TS, United Kingdom
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Webber M, Reidy H, Ansari D, Stevens M, Morris D. Enhancing social networks: a qualitative study of health and social care practice in UK mental health services. Health Soc Care Community. 2015 Mar;23(2):180-9. doi: 10.1111/hsc.12135. Epub 2014 Dec 1. PubMed 25441461 ↗
  • Webber M, Fendt-Newlin M. A review of social participation interventions for people with mental health problems. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2017 Apr;52(4):369-380. doi: 10.1007/s00127-017-1372-2. Epub 2017 Mar 12. PubMed 28286914 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on May 10, 2019, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03945994
Lead sponsor
University of York
Responsible party
Martin Webber, PhD (Professor of Social Work, Department of Social Policy & Social Work, University of York) — Principal investigator
First posted
May 10, 2019
Start date
Feb 14, 2018
Primary completion
Jul 29, 2018
Completion
Jan 28, 2019
Last update
May 10, 2019

Study contacts

Micheal Barber, PhD
study director · University of York

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in May 2019. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion