Study characteristics for IPS interventions in mild–moderate mental health populations
| Reference | Population | Intervention | Comparison | Fidelity information |
| Bejerholm et al, 201714 | Depression or bipolar (majority this sample depression) | Individual Enabling Support (IES) (principles 3–10 as for IPS) (n=33) | Traditional vocational rehabilitation—‘train then place’ (n=28) | Good fidelity as measured at 6 and 12 months using Supported Employment Fidelity Scale (SEFS) 20088 (delivery score 106–109) |
| Davis et al, 201243 | Veterans with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder | IPS (n=42) | Usual care in Veterans Health Administration Vocational Rehabilitation Programme (n=43) | Fidelity on SEFS 19979 fair (55–65) throughout study |
| Davis et al, 201842 | Veterans with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder | IPS (n=271) | Transitional work (n=270) | Fidelity on SEFS 19979 poor (55) in first 3 months, but good fidelity (63–69) maintained after that |
| Hellström et al, 201712 | Affective disorder or anxiety, no mental health service last 3 years | IPS modified for mood and anxiety disorders (IPS–MA) (n=162) | Usual services offered by job centres in Denmark (n=164) | High fidelity throughout study on IPS-259 (100–103) |
| Poremski et al, 201713 | Recently homeless, with mental illness | IPS (n=44) | Community-based services including some case manager support (n=41) | Fidelity on IPS-2510 initially fair (73) and gradually increased. Good (100) by final 8 months of intervention |
| Reme et al, 201527 | Mainly anxiety and/or depression, including subthreshold for diagnosis | At work and coping: work-focused cognitive behavioural therapy alongside IPS adapted for a population with mild–moderate mental health conditions (n=177) | Standard services from health professionals and national insurance office (n=177) | Fidelity tested postrecruitment using IPS-25.9 Reported as achieving ‘adherence to IPS’, no individual scores given |
| Reme et al, 201939 | Diagnosed psychiatric disorder (moderate severity) | IPS (n=227) | High-quality usual care. Non-IPS interventions included work with assistance or a ‘traineeship’ in a business (n=181) | All centres scored fair, good or exemplary (74–125) on IPS-2510 by second (of three) assessment points and increased scores during the trial. Exact scores not reported |
*Fidelity indicates the level of coherence of the intervention as implemented and practiced with the principles of IPS. Scores range from ‘not-IPS’ upward. Various fidelity scales were used. We have reported the scale, the reported interpretation and the scores where available. Possible high scores are 125 for SEFS 2008 and IPS-25; 77 for SEFS 1997.