A capitated model for a cross-section of severely mentally ill clients: employment outcomes

Interventions for obtaining and maintaining employment in adults with severe mental illness, a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

People with severe mental illness show high rates of unemployment and work disability, however, they often have a desire to participate in employment. People with severe mental illness used to be placed in sheltered employment or were enrolled in prevocational training to facilitate transition to a competitive job. Now, there are also interventions focusing on rapid search for a competitive job, with ongoing support to keep the job, known as supported employment. Recently, there has been a growing interest in combining supported employment with other prevocational or psychiatric interventions.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative effectiveness of various types of vocational rehabilitation interventions and to rank these interventions according to their effectiveness to facilitate competitive employment in adults with severe mental illness.

SEARCH METHODS

In November 2016 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, and CINAHL, and reference lists of articles for randomised controlled trials and systematic reviews. We identified systematic reviews from which to extract randomised controlled trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials and cluster-randomised controlled trials evaluating the effect of interventions on obtaining competitive employment for adults with severe mental illness. We included trials with competitive employment outcomes. The main intervention groups were prevocational training programmes, transitional employment interventions, supported employment, supported employment augmented with other specific interventions, and psychiatric care only.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently identified trials, performed data extraction, including adverse events, and assessed trial quality. We performed direct meta-analyses and a network meta-analysis including measurements of the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). We assessed the quality of the evidence for outcomes within the network meta-analysis according to GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 48 randomised controlled trials involving 8743 participants. Of these, 30 studied supported employment, 13 augmented supported employment, 17 prevocational training, and 6 transitional employment. Psychiatric care only was the control condition in 13 studies. Direct comparison meta-analysis of obtaining competitive employmentWe could include 18 trials with short-term follow-up in a direct meta-analysis (N = 2291) of the following comparisons. Supported employment was more effective than prevocational training (RR 2.52, 95% CI 1.21 to 5.24) and transitional employment (RR 3.49, 95% CI 1.77 to 6.89) and prevocational training was more effective than psychiatric care only (RR 8.96, 95% CI 1.77 to 45.51) in obtaining competitive employment.For the long-term follow-up direct meta-analysis, we could include 22 trials (N = 5233). Augmented supported employment (RR 4.32, 95% CI 1.49 to 12.48), supported employment (RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.36 to 1.68) and prevocational training (RR 2.19, 95% CI 1.07 to 4.46) were more effective than psychiatric care only. Augmented supported employment was more effective than supported employment (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.03 to 3.65), transitional employment (RR 2.45, 95% CI 1.69 to 3.55) and prevocational training (RR 5.42, 95% CI 1.08 to 27.11). Supported employment was more effective than transitional employment (RR 3.28, 95% CI 2.13 to 5.04) and prevocational training (RR 2.31, 95% CI 1.85 to 2.89). Network meta-analysis of obtaining competitive employmentWe could include 22 trials with long-term follow-up in a network meta-analysis.Augmented supported employment was the most effective intervention versus psychiatric care only in obtaining competitive employment (RR 3.81, 95% CI 1.99 to 7.31, SUCRA 98.5, moderate-quality evidence), followed by supported employment (RR 2.72 95% CI 1.55 to 4.76; SUCRA 76.5, low-quality evidence).Prevocational training (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.19; SUCRA 40.3, very low-quality evidence) and transitional employment were not considerably different from psychiatric care only (RR 1.00,95% CI 0.51 to 1.96; SUCRA 17.2, low-quality evidence) in achieving competitive employment, but prevocational training stood out in the SUCRA value and rank.Augmented supported employment was slightly better than supported employment, but not significantly (RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.92 to 2.14). The SUCRA value and mean rank were higher for augmented supported employment.The results of the network meta-analysis of the intervention subgroups favoured augmented supported employment interventions, but also cognitive training. However, supported employment augmented with symptom-related skills training showed the best results (RR compared to psychiatric care only 3.61 with 95% CI 1.03 to 12.63, SUCRA 80.3).We graded the quality of the evidence of the network ranking as very low because of potential risk of bias in the included studies, inconsistency and publication bias. Direct meta-analysis of maintaining competitive employment Based on the direct meta-analysis of the short-term follow-up of maintaining employment, supported employment was more effective than: psychiatric care only, transitional employment, prevocational training, and augmented supported employment.In the long-term follow-up direct meta-analysis, augmented supported employment was more effective than prevocational training (MD 22.79 weeks, 95% CI 15.96 to 29.62) and supported employment (MD 10.09, 95% CI 0.32 to 19.85) in maintaining competitive employment. Participants receiving supported employment worked more weeks than those receiving transitional employment (MD 17.36, 95% CI 11.53 to 23.18) or prevocational training (MD 11.56, 95% CI 5.99 to 17.13).We did not find differences between interventions in the risk of dropouts or hospital admissions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Supported employment and augmented supported employment were the most effective interventions for people with severe mental illness in terms of obtaining and maintaining employment, based on both the direct comparison analysis and the network meta-analysis, without increasing the risk of adverse events. These results are based on moderate- to low-quality evidence, meaning that future studies with lower risk of bias could change these results. Augmented supported employment may be slightly more effective compared to supported employment alone. However, this difference was small, based on the direct comparison analysis, and further decreased with the network meta-analysis meaning that this difference should be interpreted cautiously. More studies on maintaining competitive employment are needed to get a better understanding of whether the costs and efforts are worthwhile in the long term for both the individual and society.

Intensive case management for severe mental illness

BACKGROUND

Intensive Case Management (ICM) is a community-based package of care aiming to provide long-term care for severely mentally ill people who do not require immediate admission. Intensive Case Management evolved from two original community models of care, Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) and Case Management (CM), where ICM emphasises the importance of small caseload (fewer than 20) and high-intensity input.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of ICM as a means of caring for severely mentally ill people in the community in comparison with non-ICM (caseload greater than 20) and with standard community care. We did not distinguish between models of ICM. In addition, to assess whether the effect of ICM on hospitalisation (mean number of days per month in hospital) is influenced by the intervention's fidelity to the ACT model and by the rate of hospital use in the setting where the trial was conducted (baseline level of hospital use).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Trials Register (last update search 10 April 2015).

SELECTION CRITERIA

All relevant randomised clinical trials focusing on people with severe mental illness, aged 18 to 65 years and treated in the community care setting, where ICM is compared to non-ICM or standard care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently selected trials, assessed quality, and extracted data. For binary outcomes, we calculated risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI), on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, we estimated mean difference (MD) between groups and its 95% CI. We employed a random-effects model for analyses.We performed a random-effects meta-regression analysis to examine the association of the intervention's fidelity to the ACT model and the rate of hospital use in the setting where the trial was conducted with the treatment effect. We assessed overall quality for clinically important outcomes using the GRADE approach and investigated possible risk of bias within included trials.

MAIN RESULTS

The 2016 update included two more studies (n = 196) and more publications with additional data for four already included studies. The updated review therefore includes 7524 participants from 40 randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We found data relevant to two comparisons: ICM versus standard care, and ICM versus non-ICM. The majority of studies had a high risk of selective reporting. No studies provided data for relapse or important improvement in mental state.1. ICM versus standard careWhen ICM was compared with standard care for the outcome service use, ICM slightly reduced the number of days in hospital per month (n = 3595, 24 RCTs, MD -0.86, 95% CI -1.37 to -0.34,low-quality evidence). Similarly, for the outcome global state, ICM reduced the number of people leaving the trial early (n = 1798, 13 RCTs, RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.79, low-quality evidence). For the outcome adverse events, the evidence showed that ICM may make little or no difference in reducing death by suicide (n = 1456, 9 RCTs, RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.51, low-quality evidence). In addition, for the outcome social functioning, there was uncertainty about the effect of ICM on unemployment due to very low-quality evidence (n = 1129, 4 RCTs, RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.0, very low-quality evidence).2. ICM versus non-ICMWhen ICM was compared with non-ICM for the outcome service use, there was moderate-quality evidence that ICM probably makes little or no difference in the average number of days in hospital per month (n = 2220, 21 RCTs, MD -0.08, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.21, moderate-quality evidence) or in the average number of admissions (n = 678, 1 RCT, MD -0.18, 95% CI -0.41 to 0.05, moderate-quality evidence) compared to non-ICM. Similarly, the results showed that ICM may reduce the number of participants leaving the intervention early (n = 1970, 7 RCTs, RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.95,low-quality evidence) and that ICM may make little or no difference in reducing death by suicide (n = 1152, 3 RCTs, RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.27 to 2.84, low-quality evidence). Finally, for the outcome social functioning, there was uncertainty about the effect of ICM on unemployment as compared to non-ICM (n = 73, 1 RCT, RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.45 to 4.74, very low-quality evidence).3. Fidelity to ACTWithin the meta-regression we found that i.) the more ICM is adherent to the ACT model, the better it is at decreasing time in hospital ('organisation fidelity' variable coefficient -0.36, 95% CI -0.66 to -0.07); and ii.) the higher the baseline hospital use in the population, the better ICM is at decreasing time in hospital ('baseline hospital use' variable coefficient -0.20, 95% CI -0.32 to -0.10). Combining both these variables within the model, 'organisation fidelity' is no longer significant, but the 'baseline hospital use' result still significantly influences time in hospital (regression coefficient -0.18, 95% CI -0.29 to -0.07, P = 0.0027).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on very low- to moderate-quality evidence, ICM is effective in ameliorating many outcomes relevant to people with severe mental illness. Compared to standard care, ICM may reduce hospitalisation and increase retention in care. It also globally improved social functioning, although ICM's effect on mental state and quality of life remains unclear. Intensive Case Management is at least valuable to people with severe mental illnesses in the subgroup of those with a high level of hospitalisation (about four days per month in past two years). Intensive Case Management models with high fidelity to the original team organisation of ACT model were more effective at reducing time in hospital.However, it is unclear what overall gain ICM provides on top of a less formal non-ICM approach.We do not think that more trials comparing current ICM with standard care or non-ICM are justified, however we currently know of no review comparing non-ICM with standard care, and this should be undertaken.

A Review of Economic Evaluations of Community Mental Health Care

The authors review the methodology and findings of economic evaluations of 42 community mental health care programs reported in the English-language literature between 1979 and 2003. There were three substantial methodological problems in the literature: costs were often not completely specified, the quality of econometric analysis was often low, and most evaluations failed to integrate cost and health outcome information. Well-conducted research shows that care in the community dominates hospital in-patient care, achieving better outcomes at lower or equal cost. It is less clear what types of community programs are most cost-effective. Future research should focus on identifying which types of community care are most cost effective and at what level of intensity they are most effective.

Effectiveness of Psychiatric Rehabilitation Approaches for Employment of People with Severe Mental Illness

The authors review studies of (a) traditional psychiatric rehabilitation (including clubhouse programs and approaches offering an array of employment options) and (b) supported employment approaches for helping people with severe mental illness gain and maintain competitive employment. Based on the results of this review, the authors conclude that the effectiveness of traditional psychiatric rehabilitation in helping people gain competitive employment cannot be conclusively determined at this point. On the other hand, research on the effectiveness of supported employment was consistently positive. The authors recommend that further research be conducted on model definition, intermediate vocational options, interaction between client characteristics and program models, and long-term outcomes.

Predicting employment status and subjective quality of life in patients with schizophrenia

Although impaired social functioning, particularly poor employment status, is a cardinal feature of patients with schizophrenia and leads to decreased quality of life (QOL), few studies have addressed the relationship between these two clinical issues. The aim of this study was to determine whether employment status predicts subjective QOL and to evaluate a model in which functional capacity mediates the relationship between general cognitive performance and employment status. Ninety-three patients with schizophrenia were administered a comprehensive battery of cognitive tests, the UCSD Performance-based Skills Assessment-Brief version (UPSA-B), the Social Functioning Scale (SFS), and the Subjective Quality of Life Scale (SQLS). First, we evaluated a model for predicting the employment/occupation subscale score of the SFS using path analysis, and the model fitted well (χ2 (4) = 3.6, p = 0.46; CFI = 1.0; RMSEA < 0.001, with 90% CIs: 0-0.152). Employment status was predicted by negative symptoms and functional capacity, which was in turn predicted by general cognitive performance. Second, we added subjective QOL to this model. In a final path model, QOL was predicted by negative symptoms and employment status. This model also satisfied good fit criteria (χ2 (7) = 10.3, p = 0.17; CFI = 0.987; RMSEA = 0.072, with 90% CIs: 0-0.159). The UPSA-B and SFS scores were moderately correlated with most measures of cognitive performance. These results support the notion that better employment status enhances subjective QOL in patients with schizophrenia.

The relationship between working status and symptoms, quality of life and self-esteem in patients with schizophrenia in Turkey

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia is a severe mental disorder with substantial socioeconomic burden associated with poorer psychosocial functioning during the course of illness. In schizophrenia patients, multiple factors play a role in occupational functioning.

AIM

It was aimed to investigate the relationship between different working conditions and quality of life and self-esteem on patients with schizophrenia in Turkey.

METHODS

A total of 100 patients diagnosed as schizophrenic were divided into three groups: competitive working, supported working and unemployed.

RESULTS

The groups did not differ significantly with regard to psychotic symptoms, self-esteem and illness history. Working was associated with higher scores on quality of life subscales especially in supported working group, whereas unemployed patients had more depressive symptoms and autonomic drug side effects.

CONCLUSION

Structured working programs which may improve social life of patients with schizophrenia in many aspects is warranted in Turkey.

Fifty years of progress in community mental health in US: the growth of evidence-based practices

Fifty years have elapsed since the passage of the Community Mental Health Centers (CMHC) Act in 1963 that reflected the legislative peak of the community mental healthcare movement in the US Progress of the last 10 years is represented both by expansions of evidence-based practices (EBPs) and the development of emerging practices and fundamental shifts in the orientation of the system stimulated by the consumer-driven recovery movement. Established EBPs have accumulated expanded evidence, new EBPs have been developed and emerging EBPs are gaining increased acceptance. While the lack of widespread implementation of EBPs as well as the limitations of these technologies produces unnecessary suffering and disability, we believe that the growth of evidence for treatments and services justifies optimism for the future.

Supported employment for adults with severe mental illness

BACKGROUND

People who suffer from severe mental disorder experience high rates of unemployment. Supported employment is an approach to vocational rehabilitation that involves trying to place clients in competitive jobs without any extended preparation. The Individual placement and support (IPS) model is a carefully specified form of supported employment.

OBJECTIVES

1. To review the effectiveness of supported employment compared with other approaches to vocational rehabilitation or treatment as usual.2. Secondary objectives were to establish how far:(a) fidelity to the IPS model affects the effectiveness of supported employment,(b) the effectiveness of supported employment can be augmented by the addition of other interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (February 2010), which is compiled by systematic searches of major databases, handsearches and conference proceedings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All relevant randomised clinical trials focusing on people with severe mental illness, of working age (normally 16 to 70 years), where supported employment was compared with other vocational approaches or treatment as usual. Outcomes such as days in employment, job stability, global state, social functioning, mental state, quality of life, satisfaction and costs were sought.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (YK and KK) independently extracted data. For binary outcomes, we calculated risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI), on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, we estimated mean difference (MD) between groups and its 95% (CI). We employed a fixed-effect model for analyses. A random-effects model was also employed where heterogeneity was present.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 14 randomised controlled trials were included in this review (total 2265 people). In terms of our primary outcome (employment: days in competitive employment, over one year follow-up), supported employment seems to significantly increase levels of any employment obtained during the course of studies (7 RCTs, n = 951, RR 3.24 CI 2.17 to 4.82, very low quality of evidence). Supported employment also seems to increase length of competitive employment when compared with other vocational approaches (1 RCT, n = 204, MD 70.63 CI 43.22 to 94.04, very low quality evidence). Supported employment also showed some advantages in other secondary outcomes. It appears to increase length (in days) of any form of paid employment (2 RCTs, n = 510, MD 84.94 CI 51.99 to 117.89, very low quality evidence) and job tenure (weeks) for competitive employment (1 RCT, n = 204, MD 9.86 CI 5.36 to 14.36, very low quality evidence) and any paid employment (3 RCTs, n = 735, MD 3.86 CI -2.94 to 22.17, very low quality evidence). Furthermore, one study indicated a decreased time to first competitive employment in the long term for people in supported employment (1 RCT, n = 204, MD -161.60 CI -225.73 to -97.47, very low quality evidence). A large amount of data were considerably skewed, and therefore not included in meta-analysis, which makes any meaningful interpretation of the vast amount of data very difficult.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The limited available evidence suggests that supported employment is effective in improving a number of vocational outcomes relevant to people with severe mental illness, though there appears to exist some overall risk of bias in terms of the quality of individual studies. All studies should report a standard set of vocational and non-vocational outcomes that are relevant to the consumers and policy-makers. Studies with longer follow-up should be conducted to answer or address the critical question about durability of effects.

Generalizability of the Individual Placement and Support (IPS) model of supported employment outside the US

While reviews of controlled studies of the Individual Placement and Support (IPS) model of supported employment for clients with severe mental illness have documented its effectiveness in the US, its generalizability to other countries has not been systematically evaluated. This is the first review to compare US to non-US studies. We identified 15 randomized controlled trials of IPS programs, 9 in the US and 6 outside the US. We examined competitive employment outcomes, including employment rate, days to first job, weeks worked during follow-up, and hours worked. We also considered noncompetitive employment, program retention, and nonvocational outcomes. IPS programs had significantly better outcomes across a range of competitive employment indicators and higher retention in services than control groups. The overall competitive employment rate for IPS clients in US studies was significantly higher than in non-US studies (62% vs. 47%). The consistently positive competitive employment outcomes strongly favoring IPS over a range of comparison programs in a group of international studies suggest that IPS is an evidence-based practice that may transport well into new settings as long as programs achieve high fidelity to the IPS model, but further research is needed on international adaptations.

Intensive case management for severe mental illness

BACKGROUND

Intensive Case Management (ICM) is a community based package of care, aiming to provide long term care for severely mentally ill people who do not require immediate admission. ICM evolved from two original community models of care, Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) and Case Management (CM), where ICM emphasises the importance of small caseload (less than 20) and high intensity input.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of Intensive Case Management (caseload <20) in comparison with non-Intensive Case Management (caseload > 20) and with standard community care in people with severe mental illness. To evaluate whether the effect of ICM on hospitalisation depends on its fidelity to the ACT model and on the setting.

SEARCH STRATEGY

For the current update of this review we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (February 2009), which is compiled by systematic searches of major databases, hand searches and conference proceedings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All relevant randomised clinical trials focusing on people with severe mental illness, aged 18 to 65 years and treated in the community-care setting, where Intensive Case Management, non-Intensive Case Management or standard care were compared. Outcomes such as service use, adverse effects, global state, social functioning, mental state, behaviour, quality of life, satisfaction and costs were sought.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data independently. For binary outcomes we calculated relative risk (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI), on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data we estimated mean difference (MD) between groups and its 95% confidence interval (CI). We employed a random-effects model for analyses.We performed a random-effects meta-regression analysis to examine the association of the intervention's fidelity to the ACT model and the rate of hospital use in the setting where the trial was conducted with the treatment effect.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38 trials (7328 participants) in this review. The trials provided data for two comparisons: 1. ICM versus standard care, 2. ICM versus non-ICM.1. ICM versus standard care Twenty-four trials provided data on length of hospitalisation, and results favoured Intensive Case Management (n=3595, 24 RCTs, MD -0.86 CI -1.37 to -0.34). There was a high level of heterogeneity, but this significance still remained when the outlier studies were excluded from the analysis (n=3143, 20 RCTs, MD -0.62 CI -1.00 to -0.23). Nine studies found participants in the ICM group were less likely to be lost to psychiatric services (n=1633, 9 RCTs, RR 0.43 CI 0.30 to 0.61, I²=49%, p=0.05).One global state scale did show an Improvement in global state for those receiving ICM, the GAF scale (n=818, 5 RCTs, MD 3.41 CI 1.66 to 5.16). Results for mental state as measured through various rating scales, however, were equivocal, with no compelling evidence that ICM was really any better than standard care in improving mental state. No differences in mortality between ICM and standard care groups occurred, either due to 'all causes' (n=1456, 9 RCTs, RR 0.84 CI 0.48 to 1.47) or to 'suicide' (n=1456, 9 RCTs, RR 0.68 CI 0.31 to 1.51).Social functioning results varied, no differences were found in terms of contact with the legal system and with employment status, whereas significant improvement in accommodation status was found, as was the incidence of not living independently, which was lower in the ICM group (n=1185, 4 RCTs, RR 0.65 CI 0.49 to 0.88).Quality of life data found no significant difference between groups, but data were weak. CSQ scores showed a greater participant satisfaction in the ICM group (n=423, 2 RCTs, MD 3.23 CI 2.31 to 4.14).2. ICM versus non-ICM The included studies failed to show a significant advantage of ICM in reducing the average length of hospitalisation (n=2220, 21 RCTs, MD -0.08 CI -0.37 to 0.21). They did find ICM to be more advantageous than non-ICM in reducing rate of lost to follow-up (n=2195, 9 RCTs, RR 0.72 CI 0.52 to 0.99), although data showed a substantial level of heterogeneity (I²=59%, p=0.01). Overall, no significant differences were found in the effects of ICM compared to non-ICM for broad outcomes such as service use, mortality, social functioning, mental state, behaviour, quality of life, satisfaction and costs.3. Fidelity to ACT Within the meta-regression we found that i. the more ICM is adherent to the ACT model, the better it is at decreasing time in hospital ('organisation fidelity' variable coefficient -0.36 CI -0.66 to -0.07); and ii. the higher the baseline hospital use in the population, the better ICM is at decreasing time in hospital ('baseline hospital use' variable coefficient -0.20 CI -0.32 to -0.10). Combining both these variables within the model, 'organisation fidelity' is no longer significant, but 'baseline hospital use' result is still significantly influencing time in hospital (regression coefficient -0.18 CI -0.29 to -0.07, p=0.0027).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

ICM was found effective in ameliorating many outcomes relevant to people with severe mental illnesses. Compared to standard care ICM was shown to reduce hospitalisation and increase retention in care. It also globally improved social functioning, although ICM's effect on mental state and quality of life remains unclear. ICM is of value at least to people with severe mental illnesses who are in the sub-group of those with a high level of hospitalisation (about 4 days/month in past 2 years) and the intervention should be performed close to the original model.It is not clear, however, what gain ICM provides on top of a less formal non-ICM approach.We do not think that more trials comparing current ICM with standard care or non-ICM are justified, but currently we know of no review comparing non-ICM with standard care and this should be undertaken.

The 2009 schizophrenia PORT psychosocial treatment recommendations and summary statements

The Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team (PORT) psychosocial treatment recommendations provide a comprehensive summary of current evidence-based psychosocial treatment interventions for persons with schizophrenia. There have been 2 previous sets of psychosocial treatment recommendations (Lehman AF, Steinwachs DM. Translating research into practice: the Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team (PORT) treatment recommendations. Schizophr Bull. 1998;24:1-10 and Lehman AF, Kreyenbuhl J, Buchanan RW, et al. The Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team (PORT): updated treatment recommendations 2003. Schizophr Bull. 2004;30:193-217). This article reports the third set of PORT recommendations that includes updated reviews in 7 areas as well as adding 5 new areas of review. Members of the psychosocial Evidence Review Group conducted reviews of the literature in each intervention area and drafted the recommendation or summary statement with supporting discussion. A Psychosocial Advisory Committee was consulted in all aspects of the review, and an expert panel commented on draft recommendations and summary statements. Our review process produced 8 treatment recommendations in the following areas: assertive community treatment, supported employment, cognitive behavioral therapy, family-based services, token economy, skills training, psychosocial interventions for alcohol and substance use disorders, and psychosocial interventions for weight management. Reviews of treatments focused on medication adherence, cognitive remediation, psychosocial treatments for recent onset schizophrenia, and peer support and peer-delivered services indicated that none of these treatment areas yet have enough evidence to merit a treatment recommendation, though each is an emerging area of interest. This update of PORT psychosocial treatment recommendations underscores both the expansion of knowledge regarding psychosocial treatments for persons with schizophrenia at the same time as the limitations in their implementation in clinical practice settings.

Supported employment outcomes of a randomized controlled trial of ACT and clubhouse models

OBJECTIVE

In a randomized controlled trial, a vocationally integrated program of assertive community treatment (ACT) was compared with a certified clubhouse in the delivery of supported employment services.

METHODS

Employment rates, total work hours, and earnings for 121 adults with serious mental illness interested in work were compared with published benchmark figures for exemplary supported employment programs. The two programs were then compared on service engagement, retention, and employment outcomes in regression analyses that controlled for background characteristics, program preference, and vocational service receipt.

RESULTS

Outcomes for 63 ACT and 58 clubhouse participants met or exceeded most published outcomes for specialized supported employment teams. Compared with the clubhouse program, the ACT program had significantly (p<.05) better service engagement (ACT, 98 percent; clubhouse, 74 percent) and retention (ACT, 79 percent; clubhouse, 58 percent) over 24 months, but there was no significant difference in employment rates (ACT, 64 percent; clubhouse, 47 percent). Compared with ACT participants, clubhouse participants worked significantly longer (median of 199 days versus 98 days) for more total hours (median of 494 hours versus 234 hours) and earned more (median of $3,456 versus $1,252 total earnings). Better work performance by clubhouse participants was partially attributable to higher pay.

CONCLUSIONS

Vocationally integrated ACT and certified clubhouses can achieve employment outcomes similar to those of exemplary supported employment teams. Certified clubhouses can effectively provide supported employment along with other rehabilitative services, and the ACT program can ensure continuous integration of supported employment with clinical care.

Putative evidence of employment readiness

Readiness in the work domain has been a controversial issue for the psychiatric rehabilitation community. Judgments of a lack of readiness have relegated many persons to lives of continued unemployment and service dependency. Conversely, proponents of the rapid placement strategy of supported employment have down-played the importance of readiness. Yet, a careful review of the supported employment research suggests that readiness may indeed be an important factor in vocational outcomes. This paper presents evidence that the screening criteria employed in SE studies are often related to readiness factors and that these criteria are highly predictive of vocational outcomes. Acceptance of the importance of readiness for success in the vocational arena implies new service strategies and may serve to improve vocational outcomes in general.

Recovery in schizophrenia: reality or mere slogan

As researchers have learned more about schizophrenia, recovery has become an increasingly prominent paradigm for understanding the goals of people with schizophrenia, and for guiding research and services for these individuals. This article provides a review of the recent literature on this topic, with consideration of both the outcome and process perspectives of recovery, and research that supports psychotherapeutic treatment for individuals recovering from schizophrenia. It concludes that schizophrenia can be overcome to varying degrees--some individuals may identify themselves as "fully recovered," whereas other individuals may be in a process of recovery for their entire lives. In the future, researchers should try to reconcile process and outcome perspectives of recovery, and advocate for recovery-oriented services for individuals with schizophrenia.

Supported employment: evidence for an evidence-based practice

Supported employment for people with severe mental illnesses is an evidence-based practice, based on converging findings from 4 studies of the conversion of day treatment to supported employment and 9 randomized controlled trials comparing supported employment to a variety of alternative approaches. These two lines of research suggest that between 40% and 60% of consumers enrolled in supported employment obtain competitive employment while less than 20% of similar consumers do so when not enrolled in supported employment. Consumers who hold competitive jobs for a sustained period of time show benefits such as improved self-esteem and better symptom control, although by itself, enrollment in supported employment has no systematic impact on nonvocational outcomes, either on undesirable outcomes, such as rehospitalization, or on valued outcomes, such as improved quality of life. The psychiatric rehabilitation field has achieved consensus on a core set of principles of supported employment, although efforts continue to develop enhancements. A review of the evidence suggests strong support for 4 of 7 principles of supported employment, while the evidence for the remaining 3 is relatively weak. Continued innovation and research on principles is recommended.

Job satisfaction and job success as moderators of the self-esteem of people with mental illnesses

This study investigated job satisfaction and job success as moderators of the self-esteem of people with mental illnesses. Prior studies and models had produced contradictory findings so that the appropriateness of self-esteem as an outcome variable for psychiatric rehabilitation employment services was in doubt. Job satisfaction and success measures for 65 employed and 170 unemployed individuals with mental illnesses along with their work status and work status duration measures were combined in a single multiple regression analysis with self-esteem as the criterion. The job satisfaction and success measures were found to be significant and moderate level moderators of self-esteem for the combined sample and separately for the employed and unemployed samples. It appears that self-esteem varies with satisfaction and success with the work status and not with work status alone. These findings suggested that self-esteem was an appropriate and modifiable outcome measure for psychiatric rehabilitation services. Some practical, theoretical, and policy implications of these results were also discussed.

The role of work in the recovery of persons with psychiatric disabilities

This study explored the role of work in the recovery of employed and unemployed persons with psychiatric disabilities. Fourteen persons with psychiatric disabilities participated in semi-structured interviews. Content analysis revealed that the experience of recovery was based on six major dimensions: self-definition, empowerment, connections to others, meaning of work, vocational future, and meaning of recovery. Differences in these six dimensions led to the identification of three profiles of recovery: recovery as uncertain, recovery as a self-empowering experience, and recovery as a challenging experience. Each profile described a specific context in which participation in work or avoidance of work can be understood and vocational interventions can be designed.

Social relationships at work: does the employment model make a difference?

Social networks at work are a poorly understood component of the vocational experience of persons with severe mental illnesses. In an exploratory study, we interviewed 104 employed clients from two types of employment programs: one emphasizing a gradual sequence of group and individual placements in protected jobs and the other consisting of a supported employment model emphasizing individual, competitive placements. Using a newly developed instrument, interviewers asked clients to identify coworkers and supervisors with whom they had contact and to rate each on several aspects of their relationships, including disclosure, emotional support, criticism, and overall satisfaction. The gradual, group-oriented approach was associated with more disclosure, emotional support, and overall satisfaction with supervisor relationships, and more emotional support but also more stress from coworker relationships, than the individual placement approach. We conclude that clients enrolled in gradual group-oriented vocational programs perceive more supervisory and coworker support than do clients working in individual placement programs, although implications for long-term success in community employment are unknown.

Economic impacts of supported employment for persons with severe mental illness

BACKGROUND

Most persons with severe mental illness prefer competitive to sheltered vocational settings. Supported employment (SE) has become a clearly defined model for helping people with severe mental illness to find and maintain competitive jobs. It involves individualized and rapid placement, ongoing support and assessment, and integration of vocational and mental health staff within a single clinical team. Previous studies show that SE secures competitive employment much more effectively than do other approaches. This review focuses on its economic impacts.

METHODS

Studies reporting some service use or monetary outcomes of adding SE programs were identified. These outcomes were tabulated and are discussed in narrative form.

RESULTS

Five nonrandomized and 3 randomized studies compare SE programs with day treatment or transitional employment programs. The introduction of SE services can result in anything from an increase to a decrease in vocational service costs, depending on the extent to which they substitute for previous vocational or day treatment services. Overall service costs tend to be lower, but differences are not significant. Earnings increase only slightly on average.

CONCLUSIONS

Converting day treatment or other less effective vocational programs into SE programs can be cost-saving or cost-neutral from the hospital, community centre, and government points of view. Investments of new money into SE programs are unlikely to be materially offset by reductions in other health care costs, by reductions in government benefit payments, or by increased tax revenues. Such investments must be motivated by the value of increasing the community integration of persons with severe mental illness.

Vocational rehabilitation for people with severe mental illness

BACKGROUND

Unemployment rates are high amongst people with severe mental illness, yet surveys show that most want to work. Vocational rehabilitation services exist to help mentally ill people find work. Traditionally, these services have offered a period of preparation (Pre-vocational Training), before trying to place clients in competitive (i.e. open) employment. More recently, some services have begun placing clients in competitive employment immediately whilst providing on-the-job support (Supported Employment). It is unclear which approach is most effective.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of Pre-vocational Training and Supported Employment (for people with severe mental illness) against each other and against standard care (in hospital or community). In addition, to assess the effects of: (a) special varieties of Pre-vocational Training (Clubhouse model) and Supported Employment (Individual Placement and Support model); and (b) techniques for enhancing either approach, for example payment or psychological intervention.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Searches were undertaken of CINAHL (1982-1998), The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 1999), EMBASE (1980-1998), MEDLINE (1966-1998) and PsycLIT (1887-1998). Reference lists of eligible studies and reviews were inspected and researchers in the field were approached to identify unpublished studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of approaches to vocational rehabilitation for people with severe mental illness.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Included trials were reliably selected by a team of two raters. Data were extracted separately by two reviewers and cross-checked. Authors of trials were contacted for additional information. Relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of homogeneous dichotomous data were calculated. A random effects model was used for heterogeneous dichotomous data. Continuous data were presented in tables (there were insufficient continuous data for formal meta-analysis). A sensitivity analysis was performed, excluding poorer quality trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Eighteen randomised controlled trials of reasonable quality were identified. The main finding was that on the primary outcome (number in competitive employment) Supported Employment was significantly more effective than Pre-vocational Training; for example, at 18 months 34% of people in Supported Employment were employed versus 12% in Pre-vocational Training (RR random effects (unemployment) 0.76 95% CI 0.64 to 0.89, NNT 4.5). Clients in Supported Employment also earned more and worked more hours per month than those in Pre-vocational Training. There was no evidence that Pre-vocational Training was more effective in helping clients to obtain competitive employment than standard community care.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Supported employment is more effective than Pre-vocational Training in helping severely mentally ill people to obtain competitive employment. There is no clear evidence that Pre-vocational Training is effective.

Research on the individual placement and support model of supported employment

This paper reviews research on the Individual Placement and Support (IPS) model of supported employment for people with severe mental illness. Current evidence indicates that IPS supported employment is a more effective approach for helping people with psychiatric disabilities to find and maintain competitive employment than rehabilitative day programs or than traditional, stepwise approaches to vocational rehabilitation. There is no evidence that the rapid-job-search, high-expectations approach of IPS produces untoward side effects. IPS positively affects satisfaction with finances and vocational services, but probably has minimal impact on clinical adjustment. The cost of IPS is similar to the costs of other vocational services, and cost reductions may occur when IPS displaces traditional day treatment programs. Future research should be directed at efforts to enhance job tenure and long-term vocational careers.

A capitated model for a cross-section of severely mentally ill clients: hospitalization

Hospitalization outcomes are examined in a three year random assignment controlled study of two capitated Integrated Service Agencies (ISAs) in California. Study participants were a cross-section of severely mentally ill clients. Using the flexibility of capitated funding, the urban ISA reduced inpatient length of stay and days, but not admissions. Elements of the capitated ISA model worked together to produce clinically appropriate and less costly use of inpatient services. At the rural ISA, admissions were reduced substantially during the first two years of the demonstration but not costs.