4.2. Feasibility of conducting a full scale RCTThe overall refusal rate of eligible participants was 78.8% (227 from288). Of these, 66% (n = 152) were not interested in the interventionand 25% (n = 57) were unable to attend due to inconvenient grouptimes/locations. Seventeen (7%) of eligible participants declined participation due to their mental state. Nineteen (83%) of the 23 patientsrandomised to the LY group after baseline measures were completedreceived the intervention, the most common reason for not starting theintervention was a lack of time and inconvenience of the LY groupschedule.In terms of attrition, one LY participant was lost to follow-up at thethree-month point as she had left Hong Kong. All 27 TAU participantscompleted assessments at baseline and at T1 (post intervention) andone was lost to follow up at three-months, also due to being away fromHong Kong. The attendance rates of the 19 participants who wererandomized to the LY group ranged from 1–8 sessions, with a median of4 (mean = 4.10, SD = 2.64). Unfortunately, only two LY participantsreturned their completed workbooks with details of home practice. One practiced every day for 5 to 10 min from the start of the intervention to3 months follow-up. The other practiced LY at home on 12 occasions(for 5 to 10 min) during the month when she attended the groups. Themain reason for not competing the workbooks was due to forgetfulnessor lack of motivation. Some participants also expressed concerns aboutpracticing at home, which was explored in the individual qualitativeinterviews.