Article

From efficacy to effectiveness in community mental health services. PRiSM Psychosis Study. 10.

Section of Community Psychiatry (PRiSM), Institute of Psychiatry, London.
The British Journal of Psychiatry (Impact Factor: 6.61). 12/1998; 173:423-7. DOI: 10.1192/bjp.173.5.423
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The PRiSM Psychosis Study investigated the outcomes of community mental health services for epidemiologically representative cases of psychosis in London.
The results presented in the preceding nine papers are interpreted.
(a) The health and social gains reported in experimental studies of community health services are replicable in ordinary clinical settings, and are more effective than hospital-oriented services which they replace. (b) Dilution does occur--these gains are less pronounced than in experimental (efficacy) studies. (c) Both models of community services produced a range of improved outcomes. (d) Some limited extra advantages (in terms of met needs, improved quality of life, and social networks) were found in the intensive sector. (e) There is no consistent evidence that community-oriented services (which include in-patient beds) fail service users, their families or the wider public. On balance the results weigh slightly in favour of the two-team model (for acute and continuing care) in terms of clinical effectiveness, but the general model is almost as effective and is less expensive.
The evidence supports a community-oriented rather than a hospital-oriented approach and there is little difference between the community mental health team models.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
71 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper focuses on the second phase of the deinstitutionalisation of mental health care in which the development of community-based interventions are supposed to be implemented in local community mental health care systems. The challenge to sustainable implementation is illustrated by the Swedish case where the government put forward a national training program that sought to introduce Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) for people with severe mental illness. This study is based on document analysis and qualitative interviews with actors at the national, regional, and local levels covering a total of five regions and 15 municipalities that participated in the program. The analysis of the national experiences is put in relation to both research on public administration and policy analysis as well as to current research on implementation of evidence-based programs. The results showed a “drift” of the original model, which had already begun at the policy formulation stage and ended up in a large number of different local arrangements where only a few of the original components of ACT remained. We conclude that issues with implementation can only be fully understood by considering factors at different analytical levels.
    International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 10/2014; 11:10752-10769. · 2.00 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the possible associations between different sociodemographic, clinical, and healthcare factors and the number of unmet needs among people being treated for schizophrenia. METHODS: The sample was made up of 141 subjects who were being treated at eight mental health service networks throughout Chile. Unmet need was assessed with the Camberwell Assessment of Need, which was specifically created for people with severe mental disorders. A multiple linear regression analysis was also applied. RESULTS: It was found a direct association with clinical variables: score in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, global functioning at diagnosis, and change in global functioning at diagnosis from diagnosis to interview. However, sociodemographic (ethnicity, education level, and number of people who live with subject) and other clinical variables (age at diagnosis, and annual rate of relapse) were indirectly associated with unmet needs. CONCLUSIONS: Our results can be applied in order to coordinate and improve the effectiveness of mental health services in Chile.
    Cadernos Saúde Coletiva. 12/2011; 20(4):466-472.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Observational evidence suggests that community-based services for people with schizophrenia can be successfully provided by community health workers, when supervised by specialists, in low-income and middle-income countries. We did the COmmunity care for People with Schizophrenia in India (COPSI) trial to compare the effectiveness of a collaborative community-based care intervention with standard facility-based care. We did a multicentre, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial at three sites in India between Jan 1, 2009 and Dec 31, 2010. Patients aged 16-60 years with a primary diagnosis of schizophrenia according to the tenth edition of the International Classification of Diseases, Diagnostic Criteria for Research (ICD-10-DCR) were randomly assigned (2:1), via a computer-generated randomisation list with block sizes of three, six, or nine, to receive either collaborative community-based care plus facility-based care or facility-based care alone. Randomisation was stratified by study site. Outcome assessors were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was a change in symptoms and disabilities over 12 months, as measured by the positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS) and the Indian disability evaluation and assessment scale (IDEAS). Analysis was by modified intention to treat. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN 56877013. 187 participants were randomised to the collaborative community-based care plus facility-based care group and 95 were randomised to the facility-based care alone group; 253 (90%) participants completed follow-up to month 12. At 12 months, total PANSS and IDEAS scores were lower in patients in the intervention group than in those in the control group (PANSS adjusted mean difference -3·75, 95% CI -7·92 to 0·42; p=0·08; IDEAS -0·95, -1·68 to -0·23; p=0·01). However, no difference was shown in the proportion of participants who had a reduction of more than 20% in overall symptoms (PANSS 85 [51%] in the intervention group vs 44 [51%] in the control group; p=0·89; IDEAS 75 [48%] vs 28 [35%]). We noted a significant reduction in symptom and disability outcomes at the rural Tamil Nadu site (-9·29, -15·41 to -3·17; p=0·003). Two patients (one in each group) died by suicide during the study, and two patients died because of complications of a road traffic accident and pre-existing cardiac disease. 18 (73%) patients (17 in the intervention group) were admitted to hospital during the course of the trial, of whom seven were admitted because of physical health problems, such as acute gastritis and vomiting, road accident, high fever, or cardiovascular disease. The collaborative community-based care plus facility-based care intervention is modestly more effective than facility-based care, especially for reducing disability and symptoms of psychosis. Our results show that the study intervention is best implemented as an initial service in settings where services are scarce, for example in rural areas. Wellcome Trust.
    The Lancet 03/2014; · 39.21 Impact Factor

Full-text

Download
3 Downloads
Available from
Jul 3, 2014