Older crime victims may be particularly vulnerable to psychological distress.

To compare the clinical effectiveness of a Victim Improvement Package (VIP) to treatment as usual (TAU) for reducing continued crime-associated distress.

A three-step parallel-group single-blind randomised controlled trial.

Police-reported victims of community crime aged 65 and over were recruited from 12 local authority areas in a major urban city in England, UK.

Selection criteria—inclusion: victims of community crime aged 65 years or more, with significant Generalised Anxiety Disorder (GAD-2) and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2) distress associated with the crime. Exclusion: type of crime, diagnosis, receipt of cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) in the last 6 months; an inability to participate in CBT; cognitive impairment. Participants were typical of our local authority population; 71% were female, 69% white, with the majority of crimes associated with burglary (35%) and theft (26%). 67% (88/131) of the randomised participants were included in the primary analysis.

TAU was compared with TAU plus up to 10 sessions of a cognitively-behaviourally informed VIP, delivered by a mental health charity over 12 weeks.

Timings are in relation to the crime; baseline (3 months), post-VIP intervention (6 months) and follow-up (9 months). The primary outcome was a composite of the Beck Anxiety and Beck Depression Inventories. The primary endpoint was 6 months.

24% (4255/17 611) of reported crime victims were screened, 35% (1505/4255) were distressed. Of 60% (877/1505) rescreened at 3 months, 49% (427/877) remained distressed. Out of our target of 226, 131 participants were randomised; 65 to VIP and 66 to TAU alone. 68% (89/131) completed the primary outcome (post-intervention). The VIP showed no overall benefit; mean VIP –0.41 (SD 0.89) vs mean TAU –0.19 (SD 1.11); standardised mean difference –0.039; 95% CI (–0.39, 0.31), although stratified analyses suggested an effect in burglary victims (n=27, standardised mean difference –0.61; 95% CI (–1.22, –0.002), p=0.049).

Community crime had long-lasting impacts. The police are ideally placed to screen for distress, present in 35% of victims, but only 58% of participants were recruited and the cognitive–behavioural therapy was not delivered competently. Further research on victim care and improving the delivery and quality of therapy is required.

All procedures were approved by the University College London (UCL) Research Ethics Committee on 17 March 2016 (6960/001). International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number is ISRCTN16929670: https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN16929670.

Spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) is a common manual therapy intervention provided by healthcare providers for patients with low back pain (LBP). Responses to SMT are influenced by interactions between the patient and provider. Contextual factors may be specific to the patient, provider, patient-provider relationship or environment in which treatment is provided, with all capable of influencing clinical outcomes. The overall goal of this study is to gain a deeper understanding of contextual factors associated with manual therapy utilisation, perception and outcomes, from both patient and provider perspectives. A better understanding of modifiable contextual factors will inform future studies testing the impact on how SMT is delivered to patients influences clinical outcomes that could potentially advance the clinical science of manual therapy.

A prospective, single-arm study design with follow-up measures assessed up to 26 weeks after initiation of physical therapy for LBP will be used to assess relationships between physical therapy clinical outcomes and contextual factors related to the patient (preference, expectation, pain beliefs, pain associated distress and prior manual therapy experiences), the provider (equipoise, expectation, pain beliefs and clinical experience) and the interaction between the two (therapeutic alliance). Multimodal treatment approach of SMT (required during initial three treatment sessions within a 2week period), exercise and education supported by recent clinical practice guidelines will be encouraged for this study.

Ethics approval for the study was obtained from the University of Florida Institutional Review Board. Informed consent is required for physical therapist and patient participant enrolment in this project. The results of this study will be disseminated at professional scientific conferences and submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. Reference or approval number: IRB#: IRB202301700

NCT06590116.