Article

Does One Size Fit All? What We Can and Can't Learn From a Meta-analysis of Housing Models for Persons With Mental Illness

Human Services Research Institute, 2336 Massachusetts Ave., Cambridge, MA 02140, USA.
Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.) (Impact Factor: 1.99). 04/2009; 60(4):473-82. DOI: 10.1176/appi.ps.60.4.473
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Numerous studies have evaluated the impacts of community housing models on outcomes of persons with severe mental illness. The authors conducted a meta-analysis of 44 unique housing alternatives described in 30 studies, which they categorized as residential care and treatment, residential continuum, permanent supported housing, and nonmodel housing. Outcomes examined included housing stability, symptoms, hospitalization, and satisfaction.
Outcome scores were converted to effect size measures appropriate to the data. Effect sizes were combined to estimate random effects for housing models, which were then compared.
All models achieved significantly greater housing stability than nonmodel housing. This effect was greatest for permanent supported housing (effect size=.63, p<.05). No differences between housing models were significant. For reduction of psychiatric symptoms, only residential care and treatment differed from nonmodel housing (effect size=.65, p<.05). For hospitalization reduction, both residential care and treatment and permanent supported housing differed from nonmodel housing (p<.05). Permanent supported housing achieved the highest effect size (.73) for satisfaction and differed from nonmodel housing and residential care and treatment (p<.001 and p<.05, respectively).
The meta-analysis provides quantitative evidence that compared with nonmodel housing, housing models contribute to stable housing and other favorable outcomes. The findings also support the theory that different housing models achieve different outcomes for different subgroups. Data were not sufficient to fully answer questions designed to enable program planners and providers to better meet consumers' needs. It is important to answer these questions with research that uses common measures and adheres to scientific conventions.

1 Follower
 · 
135 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE California's full-service partnerships (FSPs) provide a combination of subsidized permanent housing and multidisciplinary team-based services with a focus on rehabilitation and recovery. The goal of the study was to examine whether participation in FSPs is associated with changes in health service use and costs compared with usual care. METHODS A quasi-experimental, pre-post, intent-to-treat design with a propensity score-matched contemporaneous control group was used to compare health service use and costs among 10,231 FSP clients and 10,231 matched clients with serious mental illness who were receiving public mental health services in California from January 1, 2004, through June 30, 2010. RESULTS Among FSP participants, the mean annual number of mental health outpatient visits increased by 55.5, and annual mental health costs increased by $11,725 relative to the matched control group. Total service costs increased by $12,056. CONCLUSIONS Participation in an FSP was associated with increases in outpatient visits and their associated costs. As supportive housing programs are implemented nationally and on a large scale, these programs will likely need to be more effectively designed and targeted in order to achieve reductions in costly inpatient services.
    Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.) 05/2014; 65(9). DOI:10.1176/appi.ps.201300380 · 1.99 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Homelessness & Health in Canada explores, for the first time, the social, structural, and environmental factors that shape the health of homeless persons in Canada. Covering a wide range of topics from youth homelessness to end-of-life care, the authors strive to outline policy and practice recommendations to respond to the ongoing public health crisis. This book is divided into three distinct but complimentary sections. In the first section, contributors explore how homelessness affects the health of particular homeless populations, focusing on the experiences of homeless youth, immigrants, refugees and people of Aboriginal ancestry. In the second section, contributors investigate how housing and public health policy as well as programmatic responses can address various health challenges, including severe mental illness and HIV/AIDS. In the final section, contributors highlight innovative Canadian interventions that have shown great promise in the field. Together, they form a comprehensive survey of an all too important topic and serve as a blueprint for action.
    04/2014; University of Ottawa Press., ISBN: 978-0-7766-2148-7
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This article presents a case series of three formerly homeless clients who were in the Housing and Urban Development‐Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD‐VASH) program 20 years ago and describes their progress since. Clients were identified from a 1992 client roster at one of the original HUD‐VASH sites. Clients were interviewed and their medical records were reviewed. The case studies were characterized as “sustained involvement in subsidized housing,” “successful discharge followed by re‐engagement,” and “case management more important than the voucher.” These cases illustrate that, first, long‐term success in supported housing has not been defined, but perhaps social integration and self‐sufficiency should be a focus. Second, mental health and substance abuse treatment appear to be important in long‐term client success, but when and how they should be promoted remains unclear. Last, case management services may represent a crucial and necessary form of support for clients in supported housing programs.
    Journal of Community Psychology 01/2013; 41(8). DOI:10.1002/jcop.21584 · 0.99 Impact Factor