Assertive community treatment versus usual care in engaging and retaining clients with severe mental illness

A comprehensive review of prioritised interventions to improve the health and wellbeing of persons with lived experience of homelessness

Background

Homelessness has emerged as a public health priority, with growing numbers of vulnerable populations despite advances in social welfare. In February 2020, the United Nations passed a historic resolution, identifying the need to adopt social-protection systems and ensure access to safe and affordable housing for all. The establishment of housing stability is a critical outcome that intersects with other social inequities. Prior research has shown that in comparison to the general population, people experiencing homelessness have higher rates of infectious diseases, chronic illnesses, and mental-health disorders, along with disproportionately poorer outcomes. Hence, there is an urgent need to identify effective interventions to improve the lives of people living with homelessness.

Objectives

The objective of this systematic review is to identify, appraise, and synthesise the best available evidence on the benefits and cost-effectiveness of interventions to improve the health and social outcomes of people experiencing homelessness.

Search Methods

In consultation with an information scientist, we searched nine bibliographic databases, including Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL, from database inception to February 10, 2020 using keywords and MeSH terms. We conducted a focused grey literature search and consulted experts for additional studies.

Selection Criteria

Teams of two reviewers independently screened studies against our inclusion criteria. We included randomised control trials (RCTs) and quasi-experimental studies conducted among populations experiencing homelessness in high-income countries. Eligible interventions included permanent supportive housing (PSH), income assistance, standard case management (SCM), peer support, mental health interventions such as assertive community treatment (ACT), intensive case management (ICM), critical time intervention (CTI) and injectable antipsychotics, and substance-use interventions, including supervised consumption facilities (SCFs), managed alcohol programmes and opioid agonist therapy. Outcomes of interest were housing stability, mental health, quality of life, substance use, hospitalisations, employment and income.

Data Collection and Analysis

Teams of two reviewers extracted data in duplicate and independently. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. We performed our statistical analyses using RevMan 5.3. For dichotomous data, we used odds ratios and risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals. For continuous data, we used the mean difference (MD) with a 95% CI if the outcomes were measured in the same way between trials. We used the standardised mean difference with a 95% CI to combine trials that measured the same outcome but used different methods of measurement. Whenever possible, we pooled effect estimates using a random-effects model.

Main Results

The search resulted in 15,889 citations. We included 86 studies (128 citations) that examined the effectiveness and/or cost-effectiveness of interventions for people with lived experience of homelessness. Studies were conducted in the United States (73), Canada (8), United Kingdom (2), the Netherlands (2) and Australia (1). The studies were of low to moderate certainty, with several concerns regarding the risk of bias. PSH was found to have significant benefits on housing stability as compared to usual care. These benefits impacted both high- and moderate-needs populations with significant cimorbid mental illness and substance-use disorders. PSH may also reduce emergency department visits and days spent hospitalised. Most studies found no significant benefit of PSH on mental-health or substance-use outcomes. The effect on quality of life was also mixed and unclear. In one study, PSH resulted in lower odds of obtaining employment. The effect on income showed no significant differences. Income assistance appeared to have some benefits in improving housing stability, particularly in the form of rental subsidies. Although short-term improvement in depression and perceived stress levels were reported, no evidence of the long-term effect on mental health measures was found. No consistent impact on the outcomes of quality of life, substance use, hospitalisations, employment status, or earned income could be detected when compared with usual services. SCM interventions may have a small beneficial effect on housing stability, though results were mixed. Results for peer support interventions were also mixed, though no benefit was noted in housing stability specifically. Mental health interventions (ICM, ACT, CTI) appeared to reduce the number of days homeless and had varied effects on psychiatric symptoms, quality of life, and substance use over time. Cost analyses of PSH interventions reported mixed results. Seven studies showed that PSH interventions were associated with increased cost to payers and that the cost of the interventions were only partially offset by savings in medical- and social-services costs. Six studies revealed that PSH interventions saved the payers money. Two studies focused on the cost-effectiveness of income-assistance interventions. For each additional day housed, clients who received income assistance incurred additional costs of US$45 (95% CI, -$19, -$108) from the societal perspective. In addition, the benefits gained from temporary financial assistance were found to outweigh the costs, with a net savings of US$20,548. The economic implications of case management interventions (SCM, ICM, ACT, CTI) was highly uncertain. SCM clients were found to incur higher costs than those receiving the usual care. For ICM, all included studies suggested that the intervention may be cost-offset or cost-effective. Regarding ACT, included studies consistently revealed that ACT saved payers money and improved health outcomes than usual care. Despite having comparable costs (US$52,574 vs. US$51,749), CTI led to greater nonhomeless nights (508 vs. 450 nights) compared to usual services.

Authors' Conclusions

PSH interventions improved housing stability for people living with homelessness. High-intensity case management and income-assistance interventions may also benefit housing stability. The majority of included interventions inconsistently detected benefits for mental health, quality of life, substance use, employment and income. These results have important implications for public health, social policy, and community programme implementation. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the urgent need to tackle systemic inequality and address social determinants of health. Our review provides timely evidence on PSH, income assistance, and mental health interventions as a means of improving housing stability. PSH has major cost and policy implications and this approach could play a key role in ending homelessness. Evidence-based reviews like this one can guide practice and outcome research and contribute to advancing international networks committed to solving homelessness.

Engagement in specialized early intervention services for psychosis as an interplay between personal agency and critical structures: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Specialized early intervention programs for individuals experiencing a first episode of psychosis prioritize service engagement, generally operationalized as attendance, treatment completion, therapeutic alliance, and treatment adherence. However, there are critical theoretical and methodological gaps in understanding how service users experience and define their engagement with the service.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to explore how current and former service users define their engagement with a specialized early intervention program.

DESIGN

A qualitative descriptive approach was used to explore service users' decisions to use, remain involved with, and/or leave early intervention services.

SETTING

This study took place in an early intervention service for psychosis in Montreal, Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-four participants who had experienced a first episode of psychosis and had been engaged in the service to varying degrees (fully engaged, partially engaged, disengaged) took part in in-depth interviews.

METHODS

In-depth interviews were employed to collect rich insights into participants' experiences and perceptions. The interviews were transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis, beginning with an inductive approach and completing the analysis using a theoretical approach. During the analysis, our original notions of engagement and disengagement were challenged by theorizing engagement in terms of agency and structure. Researchers engaged in reflexive practices to maintain and promote research rigor and trustworthiness.

RESULTS

Participants' narratives were thematically analyzed and organized into three themes: fluidity and temporality of engagement and disengagement; engagement as an ongoing negotiation; and critical structures and agency. Participants described engagement in a variety of ways, some of which were broader than service use and focused on self-care and commitment to recovery. These conceptions were subject to change as the individuals' perceptions of their needs changed. As needs changed, individuals also negotiated and renegotiated their care needs with themselves and with their treatment team. These exercises of agency were constrained by key structures: the treatment team, family and friends, and societal conceptions of mental health.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study findings argue for an expanded definition of engagement which prioritizes individuals' experience and acknowledges the steps towards recovery that they may make outside of the purview of the service. It also underlines the importance of a treatment structure which aligns with individuals' needs for both support and autonomy.

A systematic review of peer-supported interventions for health promotion and disease prevention

Prior research has examined peer programs with respect to specific peer roles (e.g.; peer support) or specific health/wellness domains (e.g.; exercise/diet), or have aggregated effects across roles and domains. We sought to conduct a systematic review that categorizes and assesses the effects of peer interventions to promote health and wellness by peer role, intervention type, and outcomes. We use evidence mapping to visually catalog and synthesize the existing research. We searched PubMed and WorldCat databases (2005 to 2015) and New York Academy of Medicine Grey Literature Report (1999 to 2016) for English-language randomized control trials. We extracted study design, study participants, type of intervention(s), peer role(s), outcomes assessed and measures used, and effects from 116 randomized controlled trials. Maps were created to provide a visual display of the evidence by intervention type, peer role, outcome type, and significant vs null or negative effects. There are more null than positive effects across peer interventions, with notable exceptions: group-based interventions that use peers as educators or group facilitators commonly improve knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions; peer educators also commonly improved social health/connectedness and engagement. Dyadic peer support influenced behavior change and peer counseling shows promising effects on physical health outcomes. Programs seeking to use peers in public health campaigns can use evidence maps to identify interventions that have previously demonstrated beneficial effects. Those seeking to produce health outcomes may benefit from identifying the mechanisms by which they expect their program to produce these effects and associated proximal outcomes for future evaluations.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

Although we attempted to register our protocol with PROSPERO, we did not meet eligibility criteria because we were past the data collection phase. The full PROSPERO-aligned protocol is available from the authors.

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.

Engaging People with Enduring Psychotic Conditions in Primary Mental Health Care and Occupational Therapy

For people who have enduring psychotic conditions, interventions need to improve social functioning as well as reducing clinical problems. There is also a need to engage and keep in touch with general practitioner (GP) patients who have fallen out of contact with specialist psychiatric care.

A new model of service was designed to engage this patient group: an expanded primary care team in an inner-city area. The team extended the GP role, provided occupational therapy and care management and used liaison psychiatry. A case study design with mixed methods was used to investigate the new service. This article reports the quantitative investigation of engagement, clinical and social outcomes and cost consequences.

The results showed that, at the start of the study, 37 people with psychotic conditions were in the sole care of their GPs; of these, 34 (92%) engaged with the new service. The sample of 28 receiving 12 months' interventions started with low levels of social functioning, which required intervention. Following interventions, they showed significant improvements in social functioning, clinical symptoms and Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS). The costs were favourable when compared with similar services. The study suggests that expanded primary care, with occupational therapy and care management, can be a feasible service to improve people's engagement and functioning.

Tailoring Outreach Efforts to Increase Primary Care Use Among Homeless Veterans: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Homeless individuals often have significant unmet health care needs that are critical to helping them leave homelessness. However, engaging them in primary and mental health care services is often elusive and difficult to achieve.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to increase health-seeking behavior and receipt of health care among homeless Veterans.

DESIGN

This was a multi-center, prospective, community-based, two-by-two randomized controlled trial of homeless Veterans.

PARTICIPANTS

Homeless Veterans not receiving primary care participated in the study.

INTERVENTIONS

An outreach intervention that included a personal health assessment and brief intervention (PHA/BI), and/or a clinic orientation (CO) was implemented.

MAIN MEASURE

We measured receipt of primary care within 4 weeks of study enrollment.

KEY RESULTS

Overall, 185 homeless Veterans were enrolled: the average age was 48.6 years (SD 10.8), 94.6% were male, 43.0% were from a minority population, 12.0% were unsheltered, 25.5% were staying in a dusk-to-dawn emergency shelter, 26.1% were in transitional housing, while 27.7% were in an unstable, doubled-up arrangement. At one month, 77.3% of the PHA/BI plus CO group accessed primary care and by 6 months, 88.7% had been seen in primary care. This was followed by the CO-only group, 50.0% of whom accessed care in the first 4 weeks, the PHI/BI-only arm at 41.0% and the Usual Care arm at 30.6%. Chi-squared tests by group were significant (p < 0.001) at both 4 weeks and 6 months. There was no difference in attitudes about care at baseline and 6 months or in use patterns once enrolled in care.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that treatment-resistant/avoidant homeless Veterans can be effectively engaged in primary and other clinical care services through a relatively low intensity, targeted and tailored outreach effort.

Consumer-providers of care for adult clients of statutory mental health services

BACKGROUND

In mental health services, the past several decades has seen a slow but steady trend towards employment of past or present consumers of the service to work alongside mental health professionals in providing services. However the effects of this employment on clients (service recipients) and services has remained unclear.We conducted a systematic review of randomised trials assessing the effects of employing consumers of mental health services as providers of statutory mental health services to clients. In this review this role is called 'consumer-provider' and the term 'statutory mental health services' refers to public services, those required by statute or law, or public services involving statutory duties. The consumer-provider's role can encompass peer support, coaching, advocacy, case management or outreach, crisis worker or assertive community treatment worker, or providing social support programmes.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of employing current or past adult consumers of mental health services as providers of statutory mental health services.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 3), MEDLINE (OvidSP) (1950 to March 2012), EMBASE (OvidSP) (1988 to March 2012), PsycINFO (OvidSP) (1806 to March 2012), CINAHL (EBSCOhost) (1981 to March 2009), Current Contents (OvidSP) (1993 to March 2012), and reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of current or past consumers of mental health services employed as providers ('consumer-providers') in statutory mental health services, comparing either: 1) consumers versus professionals employed to do the same role within a mental health service, or 2) mental health services with and without consumer-providers as an adjunct to the service.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies and extracted data. We contacted trialists for additional information. We conducted analyses using a random-effects model, pooling studies that measured the same outcome to provide a summary estimate of the effect across studies. We describe findings for each outcome in the text of the review with considerations of the potential impact of bias and the clinical importance of results, with input from a clinical expert.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 randomised controlled trials involving 2796 people. The quality of these studies was moderate to low, with most of the studies at unclear risk of bias in terms of random sequence generation and allocation concealment, and high risk of bias for blinded outcome assessment and selective outcome reporting.Five trials involving 581 people compared consumer-providers to professionals in similar roles within mental health services (case management roles (4 trials), facilitating group therapy (1 trial)). There were no significant differences in client quality of life (mean difference (MD) -0.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.80 to 0.20); depression (data not pooled), general mental health symptoms (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.24, 95% CI -0.52 to 0.05); client satisfaction with treatment (SMD -0.22, 95% CI -0.69 to 0.25), client or professional ratings of client-manager relationship; use of mental health services, hospital admissions and length of stay; or attrition (risk ratio 0.80, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.09) between mental health teams involving consumer-providers or professional staff in similar roles.There was a small reduction in crisis and emergency service use for clients receiving care involving consumer-providers (SMD -0.34 (95%CI -0.60 to -0.07). Past or present consumers who provided mental health services did so differently than professionals; they spent more time face-to-face with clients, and less time in the office, on the telephone, with clients' friends and family, or at provider agencies.Six trials involving 2215 people compared mental health services with or without the addition of consumer-providers. There were no significant differences in psychosocial outcomes (quality of life, empowerment, function, social relations), client satisfaction with service provision (SMD 0.76, 95% CI -0.59 to 2.10) and with staff (SMD 0.18, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.79), attendance rates (SMD 0.52 (95% CI -0.07 to 1.11), hospital admissions and length of stay, or attrition (risk ratio 1.29, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.31) between groups with consumer-providers as an adjunct to professional-led care and those receiving usual care from health professionals alone. One study found a small difference favouring the intervention group for both client and staff ratings of clients' needs having been met, although detection bias may have affected the latter. None of the six studies in this comparison reported client mental health outcomes.No studies in either comparison group reported data on adverse outcomes for clients, or the financial costs of service provision.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Involving consumer-providers in mental health teams results in psychosocial, mental health symptom and service use outcomes for clients that were no better or worse than those achieved by professionals employed in similar roles, particularly for case management services.There is low quality evidence that involving consumer-providers in mental health teams results in a small reduction in clients' use of crisis or emergency services. The nature of the consumer-providers' involvement differs compared to professionals, as do the resources required to support their involvement. The overall quality of the evidence is moderate to low. There is no evidence of harm associated with involving consumer-providers in mental health teams.Future randomised controlled trials of consumer-providers in mental health services should minimise bias through the use of adequate randomisation and concealment of allocation, blinding of outcome assessment where possible, the comprehensive reporting of outcome data, and the avoidance of contamination between treatment groups. Researchers should adhere to SPIRIT and CONSORT reporting standards for clinical trials.Future trials should further evaluate standardised measures of clients' mental health, adverse outcomes for clients, the potential benefits and harms to the consumer-providers themselves (including need to return to treatment), and the financial costs of the intervention. They should utilise consistent, validated measurement tools and include a clear description of the consumer-provider role (eg specific tasks, responsibilities and expected deliverables of the role) and relevant training for the role so that it can be readily implemented. The weight of evidence being strongly based in the United States, future research should be located in diverse settings including in low- and middle-income countries.

Does engagement with an intensive outreach service predict better treatment outcomes in 'high-risk' youth?

AIM

Engagement is critical in ensuring that the most 'at risk' clients receive care from psychiatric services, but the relationship between engagement and treatment outcomes remains unclear. This study investigated possible improvements in client engagement and the relationship between engagement and treatment outcomes in a group of difficult-to-engage, 'high-risk' young people seen by the Intensive Mobile Youth Outreach Service (IMYOS) in Western Metropolitan Melbourne, Australia.

METHODS

Data from standardized outcome measures on client engagement, suicidality, hostility, well-being and functioning obtained at referral, after initial assessment and at discharge, were analysed retrospectively.

RESULTS

Improved engagement was achieved after initial assessment and remained steady at discharge. All outcome measures showed significant improvement at discharge. Higher overall engagement following assessment was associated with decreased hostility risk and greater well-being and functioning at discharge. The engagement dimensions 'collaboration', 'perceived usefulness' and 'client-therapist interaction' were most consistently associated with better treatment outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Engagement at an early stage of treatment can be a useful predictor for later hostility risk, well-being and functioning. To promote better outcomes for difficult-to-engage youth, service delivery needs to focus on collaborative client involvement, the development of a 'strong' therapeutic alliance and individualization of treatment in regard to client needs.

Treatment dropout at a secondary mental health service

OBJECTIVE

To investigate mental health dropout rates in secondary care and to identify possible associations between this variable and social, demographic, psychopathologic, and health care process-related variables.

METHOD

This prospective, observational study included 994 patients referred to a secondary service by four primary care units and evaluated by a specialist mental health team between 2004 and 2008. The dependent variable was treatment dropout. Bivariate analyses investigated possible associations between treatment dropout and 57 independent variables.

RESULTS

The overall dropout rate from specialist mental health treatment was relatively low (mean = 25.6%). Only four independent variables were associated with dropout: one socioeconomic, two psychopathological, and one health care process variable. All associations were marginally significant (p < 0.1).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that family members, patients, and health care professionals are well engaged in this mental health care system based on a model of primary care. The use of this mental health model of care should be extended to other regions of our country.

WITHDRAWN: Assertive community treatment for people with severe mental disorders

BACKGROUND

Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) was developed in the early 1970s as a response to the closing down of psychiatric hospitals. ACT is a team-based approach aiming at keeping ill people in contact with services, reducing hospital admissions and improving outcome, especially social functioning and quality of life.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) as an alternative to i. standard community care, ii. traditional hospital-based rehabilitation, and iii. case management. For each of the three comparisons the main outcome indices were i. remaining in contact with the psychiatric services, ii. extent of psychiatric hospital admissions, iii. clinical and social outcome and iv. costs.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic searches of CINAHL (1982-1997), the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register of trials (1997), EMBASE (1980-1997), MEDLINE (1966-1997), PsycLIT (1974-1997) and SCISEARCH (1997) were undertaken. References of all identified studies were searched for further trial citations.

SELECTION CRITERIA

The inclusion criteria were that studies should i. be randomised controlled trials, ii. have compared ACT to standard community care, hospital-based rehabilitation, or case management and iii. have been carried out on people with severe mental disorder the majority of whom were aged from 18 to 65. Studies of ACT were defined as those in which the investigators described the intervention as "Assertive Community Treatment" or one of its synonyms. Studies of ACT as an alternative to hospital admission, hospital diversion programmes, for those in crisis, were excluded. The reliability of the inclusion criteria were evaluated.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three types of outcome data were available: i. categorical data, ii. numerical data based on counts of real life events (count data) and iii. numerical data collected by standardised instruments (scale data). Categorical data were extracted twice and then cross-checked. Peto Odds Ratios and the number needed to treat (NNT) were calculated. Numerical count data were extracted twice and cross-checked. Count data could not be combined across studies for technical reasons (the data were skewed) but all relevant observations based on count data were reported in the review. Numerical scale data were subject to a quality assessment. The validity of the quality assessment was itself assessed. Numerical scale data of suitable quality were combined using the standardised mean difference statistic where possible, otherwise the data were reported in the text or 'Other data tables' of the review.

MAIN RESULTS

ACT versus standard community care Those receiving ACT were more likely to remain in contact with services than people receiving standard community care (OR 0.51, 99%CI 0.37-0.70). People allocated to ACT were less likely to be admitted to hospital than those receiving standard community care (OR 0.59, 99%CI 0.41-0.85) and spent less time in hospital. In terms of clinical and social outcome, significant and robust differences between ACT and standard community care were found on i. accommodation status, ii. employment and iii. patient satisfaction. There were no differences between ACT and control treatments on mental state or social functioning. ACT invariably reduced the cost of hospital care, but did not have a clear cut advantage over standard care when other costs were taken into account.ACT versus hospital-based rehabilitation services Those receiving ACT were no more likely to remain in contact with services than those receiving hospital-based rehabilitation, but confidence intervals for the odds ratio were wide. People getting ACT were significantly less likely to be admitted to hospital than those receiving hospital-based rehabilitation (OR 0.2, 99%CI 0.09-0.46) and spent less time in hospital. Those allocated to ACT were significantly more likely to be living independently (OR (for not living independently) 0.19, 99%CI 0.06-0.54), but there were no other significant and robust differences in clinical or social outcome. There was insufficient data on costs to permit comparison.ACT versus case management There were no data on numbers remaining in contact with the psychiatric services or on numbers admitted to hospital. People allocated to ACT consistently spent fewer days in hospital than those given case management. There was insufficient data to permit robust comparisons of clinical or social outcome. The cost of hospital care was consistently less for those allocated to ACT, but ACT did not have a clear cut advantage over case management when other costs were taken into account.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

ACT is a clinically effective approach to managing the care of severely mentally ill people in the community. ACT, if correctly targeted on high users of in-patient care, can substantially reduce the costs of hospital care whilst improving outcome and patient satisfaction. Policy makers, clinicians, and consumers should support the setting up of ACT teams.

A review of consumer-provided services on assertive community treatment and intensive case management teams: implications for future research and practice

BACKGROUND

Assertive community treatment (ACT) is an evidence-based practice that provides intensive, in vivo services for adults with severe mental illness. Some ACT and intensive case management teams have integrated consumers as team members with varying results.

METHODS

The authors reviewed the literature examining the outcomes of having consumer providers on case management teams, with attention devoted to randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

RESULTS

Sixteen published studies were identified, including eight RCTs. Findings were mixed, with evidence supporting consumer-provided services for improving engagement and limited support for reduced hospitalizations. However, evidence was lacking for other outcomes areas such as symptom reduction or improved quality of life.

CONCLUSION

Including a consumer provider on an ACT team could enhance the outreach mechanisms of ACT, using a more recovery-focused approach to bring consumers into services and help engage them over time. More rigorous research is needed to further evaluate integrating consumer providers on teams.

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.

Professional service utilisation among patients with severe mental disorders

BACKGROUND

Generally, patients with serious mental disorders (SMD) are frequent users of services who generate high care-related costs. Current reforms aim to increase service integration and primary care for improved patient care and health-care efficiency. This article identifies and compares variables associated with the use by patients with SMD of services offered by psychiatrists, case managers, and general practitioners (GPs). It also compares frequent and infrequent service use.

METHOD

One hundred forty patients with SMD from five regions in Quebec, Canada, were interviewed on their use of services in the previous year. Patients were also required to complete a questionnaire on needs-assessment. In addition, data were collected from clinical records. Descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

Most patients used services from psychiatrists and case managers, but no more than half consulted GPs. Most patients were followed at least by two professionals, chiefly psychiatrists and case managers. Care access, continuity of care, and total help received were the most important variables associated with the different types of professional consultation. These variables were also associated with frequent use of professional service, as compared with infrequent service use. In all, enabling factors rather than need factors were the core predictors of frequency of service utilisation by patients with SMD.

CONCLUSION

This study reveals that health care system organisation and professional practice--rather than patient need profiles--are the core predictors of professional consultation by patients with SMD. The homogeneity of our study population, i.e. mainly users with schizophrenia, recently discharged from hospital, may partly account for these results. Our findings also underscored the limited involvement of GPs in this patient population's care. As comorbidity is often associated with serious mental disorders, closer follow-up by GPs is needed. Globally, more effort should be directed at increasing shared-care initiatives, which would enhance coordination among psychiatrists, GPs, and psychosocial teams (including case managers). Finally, there is a need to increase awareness among health care providers, especially GPs, of the level of care required by patients with disabling and serious mental disorders.

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.

Disengagement from mental health services. A literature review

This paper reviews the literature on disengagement from mental health services examining how the terms engagement and disengagement are defined, what proportion of patients disengage from services, and what sociodemographic variables predict disengagement. Both engagement and disengagement appear to be poorly conceptualised, with a lack of consensus on accepted and agreed definitions. Rates of disengagement from mental health services vary from 4 to 46%, depending on the study setting, service type and definition of engagement used. Sociodemographic and clinical predictors of disengagement also vary, with only a few consistent findings, suggesting that such associations are complex and multifaceted. Most commonly reported associations of disengagement appear to be with sociodemographic variables including young age, ethnicity and deprivation; clinical variables such as lack of insight, substance misuse and forensic history; and service level variables such as availability of assertive outreach provision. Given the importance of continuity of care in serious mental disorders, there is a need for a consensual, validated and reliable measure of engagement which can be used to explore associations between patient, illness and service related variables and can inform service provision for difficult to reach patients.

Early intervention with difficult to engage, 'high-risk' youth: evaluating an intensive outreach approach in youth mental health

BACKGROUND

Although intensive outreach (IO) models such as assertive community treatment and intensive case management have a strong evidence base in adult psychiatry, their effectiveness in the early intervention sector is unknown.

AIM

To explore client characteristics and treatment effects in a group of difficult to engage, 'high-risk' young people, seen by the Intensive Mobile Youth Outreach Service (IMYOS, ORYGEN Youth Heath) in Western Metropolitan Melbourne.

METHODS

The clinical files of 47 clients were audited, targeting demographic and treatment outcome data prior to and during IMYOS involvement.

RESULTS

Clients typically presented with traumatic childhoods, disrupted education, repeated treatment dropout, poor mental health and 'high-risk' behaviours. Results showed a significant reduction in risk to self and others between referral and discharge, and significantly lower admissions rates and inpatient days compared with the 9 months prior to referral.

CONCLUSIONS

IO might be an effective early intervention strategy to minimize risk of harm and decrease hospitalization in young people. However, conclusions are provisional as there was no control group included in this study. Further study is required, perhaps with a waiting list control.

Engagement and retention in services among formerly homeless adults with co-occurring mental illness and substance abuse: voices from the margins

This qualitative study analyzed 72 interviews with 39 formerly homeless psychiatric consumers to develop a grounded theory model of engagement and retention in mental health and substance abuse services. Person-centered themes included severity of mental illness and substance abuse (the latter also conflicting with programmatic abstinence requirements). System-related themes inhibiting service use included program rules and restrictions and a lack of one-on-one therapy. Those promoting service use were acts of kindness by staff, pleasant surroundings, and the promise (or attainment) of independent housing. Implications of these findings are discussed in terms of integrating consumers' opinions about services to enhance treatment engagement and retention.

Fatores associados ao abandono de tratamento em saúde mental em uma unidade de nível secundário do Sistema Municipal de Saúde

A ocorrência de abandono de tratamento psiquiátrico de nível secundário é uma relevante questão clínica e econômica. Taxas de abandono em psiquiatria são mais altas que em outras especialidades médicas. Estudos publicados nos últimos 15 anos têm identificado diversos fatores estatisticamente associados ao não-comparecimento às consultas e/ou ao abandono de tratamento em saúde mental. OBJETIVO: Avaliar variáveis demográficas, psicopatológicas, de diagnóstico e tratamento enquanto possíveis preditores de abandono de tratamento em serviço especializado de saúde mental. MÉTODO: Estudo observacional, avaliando 896 pacientes encaminhados, no período de abril de 2004 a março de 2006, por Unidades Básicas de Saúde da área de abrangência do serviço especializado. RESULTADOS: Pacientes solteiros, com idade abaixo da média do grupo (39,2 anos) e desempregados abandonaram significantemente mais o tratamento. Duas variáveis relativas ao exame psicopatológico se associaram significantemente com abandono de tratamento (memória quanto ao passado recente e relação do humor com fatos reais, atuais). Pacientes adultos que receberam diagnóstico psiquiátrico de oligofrenia abandonaram significantemente menos e pacientes com diagnóstico relativo aos transtornos da infância e adolescência (F80-F98 da CID-10) também abandonaram significantemente mais o tratamento. O registro de comorbidade psiquiátrica e tratamento exclusivamente farmacológico se associaram a não abandono do tratamento. CONCLUSÃO: Os resultados confirmam achados de diferentes autores da evidência de características associadas a abandono ao tratamento. Tais achados sugerem que determinados subgrupos de pacientes necessitem de abordagens customizadas, a fim de influenciar positivamente sua adesão final ao tratamento indicado.

Veterans Affairs Health System and mental health treatment retention among patients with serious mental illness: evaluating accessibility and availability barriers

OBJECTIVE

We examine the impact of two dimensions of access-geographic accessibility and availability-on VA health system and mental health treatment retention among patients with serious mental illness (SMI).

METHODS

Among 156,631 patients in the Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder in fiscal year 1998 (FY98), we used Cox proportional hazards regression to model time to first 12-month gap in health system utilization, and in mental health services utilization, by the end of FY02. Geographic accessibility was operationalized as straight-line distance to nearest VA service site or VA psychiatric service site, respectively. Service availability was assessed using county-level VA hospital beds and non-VA beds per 1,000 county residents. Patients who died without a prior gap in care were censored.

RESULTS

There were 32, 943 patients (21 percent) with a 12-month gap in health system utilization; 65,386 (42 percent) had a 12-month gap in mental health services utilization. Gaps in VA health system utilization were more likely if patients were younger, nonwhite, unmarried, homeless, nonservice-connected, if they had bipolar disorder, less medical morbidity, an inpatient stay in FY98, or if they lived farther from care or in a county with fewer VA inpatient beds. Similar relationships were observed for mental health, however being older, female, and having greater morbidity were associated with increased risks of gaps, and number of VA beds was not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Geographic accessibility and resource availability measures were associated with long-term continuity of care among patients with SMI. Increased distance from providers was associated with greater risks of 12-month gaps in health system and mental health services utilization. Lower VA inpatient bed availability was associated with increased risks of gaps in health system utilization. Study findings may inform efforts to improve treatment retention.

Programa de tratamento assertivo na comunidade (PACT) e gerenciamento de casos (case management): revisão de 20 anos da literatura

OBJETIVO: Realizar uma revisão de estudos sobre programa de tratamento assertivo na comunidade (PACT) e case management para verificar se os resultados demonstram desfechos mais favoráveis quando tais modelos são implementados na rede comunitária de assistência para portadores de doença mental grave e persistente. MÉTODOS: A coleta de artigos - publicados entre 1985 e 2005 - foi realizada em duas etapas: a primeira, na base de dados PubMed, com expressões-chave mental health, community care, services evaluation e seleção de artigos cuja temática era PACT e case management, e a segunda, no banco de dados da revista Psychiatric Services, com palavras-chave assertive community treatment, PACT e case management. Foram desconsiderados estudos que analisavam serviços exclusivos para crianças, idosos e pacientes com diagnóstico único de abuso de álcool/drogas; abordavam unicamente os custos da intervenção e se referiam exclusivamente a serviços hospitalares. RESULTADOS: A partir da leitura dos 73 estudos selecionados, os autores descreveram oito categorias nas quais os artigos foram agrupados, visto que um artigo poderia pertencer a mais de uma categoria. CONCLUSÕES: O PACT e o case management são estratégias importantes e reconhecidamente mais eficazes, quando comparados a outros modelos de cuidado, em trazer evoluções favoráveis para indivíduos com doença mental grave e persistente.

Systematic review of case management

The purpose of the present paper was to review the current state of evidence for types of case management, focusing on the last 10 years since publication of the Cochrane Systematic Reviews of case management and assertive community treatment. A literature review of electronic databases from 1995 to the present to identify recent research on psychiatric case management, both original studies and reviews, was carried out. Original articles were organized on basis of year of study, experimental group and outcome variables to determine patterns. Sixty relevant papers were located. Thirty-nine are reports of experimental trials of types of case management and 21 are reviews or discussion papers. The focus of research is on assertive community treatment or intensive case management, with only five papers on other forms of less intense case management. Numerous outcomes have been examined, of those examined often enough to draw meaningful conclusions only one, engagement with services, has been consistently positive. All other outcomes have produced mixed results. The strength of findings in favour of case management has weakened over time. A heterogeneous group of experimental designs limits comparisons. Numerous issues with methodology and definitions of types of case management have beset research in this field. Assertive types of case management (including assertive community treatment and intensive case management) are more effective than standard case management in reducing total number of days spent in hospital, improving engagement, compliance, independent living and patient satisfaction. More important than the type of service configuration is to understand the clinical criteria of the services provided and their effectiveness.

Predictors of service disengagement in first-admitted adolescents with psychosis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the risk and predictors of service disengagement in adolescents with first-episode psychosis (FEP) receiving their first treatment in a long-standing early intervention and prevention centre.

METHOD

The Early Psychosis Prevention and Intervention Centre (EPPIC) in Australia admitted 157 adolescents, ages 15 to 18, with FEP from January 1998 to December 2000. Treatment at EPPIC spans an average of 18-months. Data were collected from patients' charts using a standardized questionnaire; 134 charts were available. Time to service disengagement was the outcome of interest. Baseline and treatment predictors of service disengagement were examined via Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

Kaplan-Meier 18-month risk of service disengagement was 0.28. A lower severity of illness at baseline (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.2; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.1-0.4), living without family during treatment (HR = 4.8; 95% CI 2.1-11.2), and persistent substance use during treatment (HR = 2.6; 95% CI 1.1-5.9) contributed significantly to predicting service disengagement. Neither initial substance use nor insight at baseline was related to service disengagement.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians should focus on treating substance use and establishing a social network if family support is missing in adolescents with FEP. In addition, clinicians should apply strategies to keep in touch with those adolescents who might not see the necessity of continuous treatment because of a moderate severity of illness.

Impact of referral source and study applicants' preference for randomly assigned service on research enrollment, service engagement, and evaluative outcomes

OBJECTIVE

The inability to blind research participants to their experimental conditions is the Achilles' heel of mental health services research. When one experimental condition receives more disappointed participants, or more satisfied participants, research findings can be biased in spite of random assignment. The authors explored the potential for research participants' preference for one experimental program over another to compromise the generalizability and validity of randomized controlled service evaluations as well as cross-study comparisons.

METHOD

Three Cox regression analyses measured the impact of applicants' service assignment preference on research project enrollment, engagement in assigned services, and a service-related outcome, competitive employment.

RESULTS

A stated service preference, referral by an agency with a low level of continuity in outpatient care, and willingness to switch from current services were significant positive predictors of research enrollment. Match to service assignment preference was a significant positive predictor of service engagement, and mismatch to assignment preference was a significant negative predictor of both service engagement and employment outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Referral source type and service assignment preference should be routinely measured and statistically controlled for in all studies of mental health service effectiveness to provide a sound empirical base for evidence-based practice.

Does case management work? The evidence and the abuse of evidence-based medicine

OBJECTIVES

This study reviews typologies of psychiatric case management and then discusses the efficacy, effectiveness and cost effectiveness of psychiatric case management, with particular focus on evidence from Australia and the UK. Subsequently, it aims to examine the way such evidence has been interpreted in the context of UK psychiatric research and services. Finally it examines the ways in which, by the selective reviewing or editorializing of evidence, case management has been brought into disrepute in the UK.

METHOD

This study reviews literature of the recent evidence for case management, and asks three questions of case management: has it been shown to be efficacious in controlled research, is it effective in applied settings, and is it cost effective? An examination is then made of the concurrent representations of the UK evidence in both the academic literature and the media.

RESULTS

There is strong evidence for the efficacy effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of case management in psychiatry, the closer it conforms to active and assertive community treatment models. It appears, however, that studies and evidence-based reviews of case management have possibly been misused and misrepresented in a highly charged atmosphere of professional media debate. The potential for this abuse is not limited to psychiatry and remains a challenge for all evidence-based practice.

CONCLUSION

On the evidence, assertive community treatment case management is one of the most effective interventions in psychiatry today. Despite improving the evidence base for practice (e.g. as has occurred for case-management in psychiatry), evidence-based medicine (EBM) is still susceptible to compromise and misrepresentation, due to unexamined or undeclared bias. Unless this potential for abuse is recognized and checked, EBM in psychiatry is in danger of being discredited at the hand of some of its own proponents. There is a need for more rigorous pursuit of evidence-based psychiatry, including more systematic declaration of bias in all research, whether quantitative or qualitative in design.

Assertive community treatment for people with severe mental disorders

BACKGROUND

Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) was developed in the early 1970s as a response to the closing down of psychiatric hospitals. ACT is a team-based approach aiming at keeping ill people in contact with services, reducing hospital admissions and improving outcome, especially social functioning and quality of life.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) as an alternative to i. standard community care, ii. traditional hospital-based rehabilitation, and iii. case management. For each of the three comparisons the main outcome indices were i. remaining in contact with the psychiatric services, ii. extent of psychiatric hospital admissions, iii. clinical and social outcome and iv. costs.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic searches of CINAHL (1982-1997), the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register of trials (1997), EMBASE (1980-1997), MEDLINE (1966-1997), PsycLIT (1974-1997) and SCISEARCH (1997) were undertaken. References of all identified studies were searched for further trial citations.

SELECTION CRITERIA

The inclusion criteria were that studies should i. be randomised controlled trials, ii. have compared ACT to standard community care, hospital-based rehabilitation, or case management and iii. have been carried out on people with severe mental disorder the majority of whom were aged from 18 to 65. Studies of ACT were defined as those in which the investigators described the intervention as "Assertive Community Treatment" or one of its synonyms. Studies of ACT as an alternative to hospital admission, hospital diversion programmes, for those in crisis, were excluded. The reliability of the inclusion criteria were evaluated.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three types of outcome data were available: i. categorical data, ii. numerical data based on counts of real life events (count data) and iii. numerical data collected by standardised instruments (scale data). Categorical data were extracted twice and then cross-checked. Peto Odds Ratios and the number needed to treat (NNT) were calculated. Numerical count data were extracted twice and cross-checked. Count data could not be combined across studies for technical reasons (the data were skewed) but all relevant observations based on count data were reported in the review. Numerical scale data were subject to a quality assessment. The validity of the quality assessment was itself assessed. Numerical scale data of suitable quality were combined using the standardised mean difference statistic where possible, otherwise the data were reported in the text or 'Other data tables' of the review.

MAIN RESULTS

ACT versus standard community care Those receiving ACT were more likely to remain in contact with services than people receiving standard community care (OR 0.51, 99%CI 0.37-0.70). People allocated to ACT were less likely to be admitted to hospital than those receiving standard community care (OR 0.59, 99%CI 0.41-0.85) and spent less time in hospital. In terms of clinical and social outcome, significant and robust differences between ACT and standard community care were found on i. accommodation status, ii. employment and iii. patient satisfaction. There were no differences between ACT and control treatments on mental state or social functioning. ACT invariably reduced the cost of hospital care, but did not have a clear cut advantage over standard care when other costs were taken into account. ACT versus hospital-based rehabilitation services Those receiving ACT were no more likely to remain in contact with services than those receiving hospital-based rehabilitation, but confidence intervals for the odds ratio were wide. People getting ACT were significantly less likely to be admitted to hospital than those receiving hospital-based rehabilitation (OR 0.2, 99%CI 0.09-0.46) and spent less time in hospital. Those allocated to ACT were significantly more likely to be living independently (OR (for not living independently) 0.19, 99%CI 0.06-0. (A

Comparing practice patterns of consumer and non-consumer mental health service providers

The practice patterns of consumer and non-consumer providers of assertive community treatment are compared using both quantitative and qualitative data collected as part of a randomized trial. Activity log data showed that there were few substantive differences in the pattern of either the administrative or direct service tasks performed by the two teams. In contrast, the qualitative data revealed that there were discernable differences in the "culture" of the two teams. The consumer team "culture" emphasized "being there" with the client while the non-consumer team was more concerned with accomplishing tasks.