Comparative effectiveness of three approaches to serving people with severe mental illness and substance abuse disorders. Tailoring systematic reviews to meet critical priorities in maternal health in the intrapartum period. A trial of problem-solving by community mental health nurses for anxiety, depression and life difficulties among general practice patients. The CPN-GP study. One-year follow-up of a multiple-family-group intervention for Chinese families of patients with schizophrenia. Effectiveness of a quality improvement intervention for adolescent depression in primary care clinics: a randomized controlled trial. Randomized trial of general hospital and residential alternative care for patients with severe and persistent mental illness. Challenging behaviour: the effectiveness of specialist support teams. Evaluation of a MS specialist nurse programme. Improving services for disadvantaged childbearing women. The REACT study: randomised evaluation of assertive community treatment in north London. An exploratory study of assertive community treatment for people with intellectual disability and psychiatric disorders: conceptual, clinical, and service issues. The Families In Recovery From Stroke Trial (FIRST): primary study results. A randomized clinical trial of a new behavioral treatment for drug abuse in people with severe and persistent mental illness. RCT of a manualized social treatment for high-functioning autism spectrum disorders. Detection and management of mental health problems of older patients by primary care providers. Assertive community treatment for people with severe mental illness: the effect on hospital use and costs. An investigation of the adequacy of MEDLINE searches for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the effects of mental health care.
This study examines the rationale for and relative effectiveness of three intervention models for treating people with severe mental illness and substance abuse disorders: Twelve Step recovery, behavioral skills training, and intensive case management. Using clinical trial methods, 132 dually diagnosed clients were assigned to three service approaches. Changes in client psychosocial outcomes, and psychiatric and substance abuse symptomatology were tracked over a 24-month period. Differential effectiveness was evident, with clients in the behavioral skills group demonstrating the most positive and significant differences in psychosocial functioning and symptomatology, compared with the Twelve Step recovery approach. However, the case management intervention also resulted in several positive and important differences compared with the Twelve Step recovery approach. We also found significant changes over time, not only at 6 months but increasingly positive changes in psychosocial functioning at 12 and 18 months as well. These results underscore the need for clinical trials to further examine the relative cost effectiveness of treatment approaches for dually disordered clients and to incorporate means of assessing subgroup differences so that the interventions being tested can be further refined and targeted to a broad set of needs among the dually diagnosed. Health care practitioners and researchers commonly call for greater reliance on evidence as a means to achieve improvement in quality of care. Systematic reviews provide a means to accelerate the use of evidence-based clinical interventions and public health practices. The extent to which these time- and resource-intensive systematic reviews currently address critical maternal health priorities in the intrapartum period is unclear. This analysis summarises key maternal health and research priorities, maps these priorities to existing reviews, identifies gaps in the literature that can be addressed with systematic reviews, and highlights key methodological concerns in conducting systematic reviews. The analysis draws on published data on maternal morbidities and an overview of 108 systematic reviews in Medline in the past 5 years using the MeSH terms 'Delivery, Obstetric,' to draw the links between health priorities, research priorities, existing evidence and missing evidence. Key causes of morbidity during labour and delivery in the United States include haemorrhage, pre-eclampsia and eclampsia, obstetric trauma and infection. Analyses of maternal morbidity and mortality suggest that key concerns include racial and ethnic disparities in health outcomes and the prevention of adverse events. Systematic reviews, however, generally tend to focus on the reduction of harms associated with interventions, are frequently limited to randomised designs, and do not address issues of health disparities. The results suggest that advances in evidence-based care in maternal health require that systematic reviews address issues of prevention of adverse events, include a larger variety of study designs when necessary and pay closer attention to health disparities. To compare the effectiveness of community mental health nurse (CMHN) problem-solving and generic CMHN care, against usual general practitioner (GP) care in reducing symptoms, alleviating problems, and improving social functioning and quality of life for people living in the community with common mental disorders; and to undertake a cost comparison of each CMHN treatment compared with usual GP care.
                A pragmatic, randomised controlled trial with three arms: CMHN problem-solving, generic CMHN care and usual GP care.
                General practices in two southern English counties were included in the study. CMHNs were employed by local NHS trusts providing community mental health services.
                Participants were GP patients aged 18--65 years with a new episode of anxiety, depression or reaction to life difficulties and had to score at least 3 points on the General Health Questionnaire-12 screening tool. Symptoms had to be present for a minimum of 4 weeks but no longer than 6 months.
                Patients were randomised to one of three groups: (1) CMHN problem-solving treatment, (2) generic CMHN treatment, or (3) usual GP care. All three groups of patients remained free to consult their GPs throughout the course of the study, and could be prescribed psychotropic drug treatments.
                Patients were assessed at baseline, and 8 weeks and 26 weeks after randomisation. The primary outcome measure was psychological symptoms measured on the Clinical Interview Schedule -- Revised. Other measures included social functioning, health-related quality of life, problem severity and satisfaction. The economic outcomes were evaluated with a cost--utility analysis.
                Twenty-four CMHNs were trained to provide problem-solving under supervision, and another 29 were referred patients for generic support. In total, 247 patients were randomised to the three arms of the study, referred by 98 GPs in 62 practices. All three groups of patients were greatly improved by the 8-week follow-up. No significant differences were found between the groups at 8 weeks or 26 weeks in symptoms, social functioning or quality of life. Greater satisfaction with treatment was found in the CMHN groups. CMHN care represented a significant additional health service cost and there were no savings in sickness absence.
                The study found that specialist mental health nurse support is no better than support from GPs for patients with anxiety, depression and reactions to life difficulties. The results suggest that healthcare providers could consider adopting policies of restricting referrals of unselected patients with common mental disorders to specialist CMHNs, although there may be other roles in primary care that CMHNs could play effectively. Further research should address the predictors of chronicity in common mental disorders and target extra treatment. More research is also needed into the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of problem-solving treatment for other disorders, of facilitated self-help treatments for common mental disorders and of CMHN care for people with severe and enduring mental illnesses, as well as the prevention of mental disorders. This study tested the effectiveness of a mutual support multiple-family-group intervention for schizophrenia in terms of improvements in patients' psychosocial functioning, use of mental health services, and rehospitalization compared with a psychoeducation intervention and standard care.
                A controlled trial was conducted in a sample of 96 Chinese families who were caring for a relative with schizophrenia in Hong Kong. The families were randomly assigned to one of three groups: mutual support (N=32), psychoeducation (N=33), and standard care (N=31). The interventions were delivered at two psychiatric outpatient clinics over a six-month period. The mutual support and psychoeducation interventions consisted of 12 group sessions every two weeks, each lasting about two hours. The mutual support group was a peer-led group designed to provide information, emotional support, and coping skills for caregiving in stages. The psychoeducation group was a professional-led group designed to educate families about the biological basis of schizophrenia and treatment and to improve illness management and coping skills. The standard care group and the other two groups received routine psychiatric outpatient care during the intervention. Data analyses of multiple outcomes over one-year follow-up were conducted on an intention-to-treat basis.
                Multivariate analyses of variance showed that the mutual support intervention was associated with consistently greater improvements in patients' functioning and rehospitalization and stable use of mental health services over the follow-up period compared with the other two interventions.
                The study provides evidence that mutual support groups can be an effective family intervention for Chinese persons with mental illness in terms of improving patients' functioning and hospitalization without increasing their use of mental health services. Depression is a common condition associated with significant morbidity in adolescents. Few depressed adolescents receive effective treatment for depression in primary care settings.
                To evaluate the effectiveness of a quality improvement intervention aimed at increasing access to evidence-based treatments for depression (particularly cognitive-behavior therapy and antidepressant medication), relative to usual care, among adolescents in primary care practices.
                Randomized controlled trial conducted between 1999 and 2003 enrolling 418 primary care patients with current depressive symptoms, aged 13 through 21 years, from 5 health care organizations purposively selected to include managed care, public sector, and academic medical center clinics in the United States.
                Usual care (n = 207) or 6-month quality improvement intervention (n = 211) including expert leader teams at each site, care managers who supported primary care clinicians in evaluating and managing patients' depression, training for care managers in manualized cognitive-behavior therapy for depression, and patient and clinician choice regarding treatment modality. Participating clinicians also received education regarding depression evaluation, management, and pharmacological and psychosocial treatment.
                Depressive symptoms assessed by Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale (CES-D) score. Secondary outcomes were mental health-related quality of life assessed by Mental Health Summary Score (MCS-12) and satisfaction with mental health care assessed using a 5-point scale.
                Six months after baseline assessments, intervention patients, compared with usual care patients, reported significantly fewer depressive symptoms (mean [SD] CES-D scores, 19.0 [11.9] vs 21.4 [13.1]; P = .02), higher mental health-related quality of life (mean [SD] MCS-12 scores, 44.6 [11.3] vs 42.8 [12.9]; P = .03), and greater satisfaction with mental health care (mean [SD] scores, 3.8 [0.9] vs 3.5 [1.0]; P = .004). Intervention patients also reported significantly higher rates of mental health care (32.1% vs 17.2%, P<.001) and psychotherapy or counseling (32.0% vs 21.2%, P = .007).
                A 6-month quality improvement intervention aimed at improving access to evidence-based depression treatments through primary care was significantly more effective than usual care for depressed adolescents from diverse primary care practices. The greater uptake of counseling vs medication under the intervention reinforces the importance of practice interventions that include resources to enable evidence-based psychotherapy for depressed adolescents. Severe and persistent mental illnesses are often lifelong and characterized by intermittent exacerbations requiring hospitalization. Providing needed care within budgetary constraints to this largely publicly subsidized population requires technologies that reduce costly inpatient episodes. The authors report a prospective randomized trial to test the clinical effectiveness of a model of acute residential alternative treatment for patients with persistent mental illness requiring hospital-level care.
                Patients enrolled in the Montgomery County, Md., public mental health system who experienced an illness exacerbation and were willing to accept voluntary treatment were randomly assigned to the acute psychiatric ward of a general hospital or a community residential alternative. There were no psychopathology-based exclusion criteria. Treatment episode symptom improvement, satisfaction, discharge status, and 6-month pre- and postepisode acute care utilization, psychosocial functioning, and patient satisfaction were assessed.
                Of 185 patients, 119 (64%) were successfully placed at their assigned treatment site. Case mix data indicated that patients treated in the hospital (N = 50) and the alternative (N = 69) were comparably ill. Treatment episode symptom reduction and patient satisfaction were comparable for the two settings. Nine (13%) of 69 patients randomly assigned to the alternative required transfer to a hospital unit; two (4%) of 50 patients randomly assigned to the hospital could not be stabilized and required transfer to another facility. Psychosocial functioning, satisfaction, and acute care use in the 6 months following admission were comparable for patients treated in the two settings and did not differ significantly from functioning before the acute episode.
                Hospitalization is a frequent and high-cost consequence of severe mental illness. For patients who do not require intensive general medical intervention and are willing to accept voluntary treatment, the alternative program model studied provides outcomes comparable to those of hospital care. Two specialist community services for people with learning disabilities and challenging behaviour were evaluated over approximately 3 years. Intervention effectiveness was assessed with respect to changes in subjects' skills, challenging behaviours, mental health and quality of life, and to changes in staff morale. Subjects assessed as having challenging behaviour but not referred for specialist input were also studied. Comparison of changes in referred and non-referred samples over time showed minor differences only, indicating little intervention effect and demonstrating stability in the comparison sample. Analysis of the two services separately yielded different results. Positive client change was evident with respect to one service, whilst little change was noted with respect to the other. There was little evidence to suggest that either service had any effect on staff morale. Differences between the two services in terms of structure, staffing characteristics and operational policies are discussed as possible factors in the differential results obtained. A major issue raised by the study concerns the quality of settings from which the subjects were referred for specialist support. This is discussed as a factor which may limit the effectiveness of specialist input. Specialist nurses are being promoted as a means of improving the health care provided to people with multiple sclerosis (MS).
                To identify the impact of a programme of MS specialist nurses on MS health care provision and on the health and well-being of people with MS.
                A quasi-experimental design comparing an intervention group in which new MS nurse posts were installed with a control group that had no MS nurse posts.
                Six neurological services in four English regions.
                Seven hundred and fifty-three of the 1510 people invited to participate returned completed questionnaires at baseline. Follow-up of participants was 82% with 616 patients participating in the main outcome analysis.
                Data were collected prospectively before the appointment of the MS nurses and then at 12 and 24 months. Data were collected via a postal questionnaire comprising questions related to care processes (information provision and care quality) and health outcome measures, hospital admissions, MS complications, health-related quality of life (SF36) and disease impact (MS Impact Scale-29). Analysis repeated measures in CAT MOD for process variables and ANCOVA to longest follow-up for outcome measures.
                Information provision was higher in the intervention group (68% (n=153) compared to 53% (n=98) at 24 months) but no significant improvement was observed in information provision through time compared to the control group. There was an increase in the availability of a contact person in the intervention group, at 24 months 83% (n=42) had a contact person compared to 44% in the control (p=0.01). The only significant finding in relation to MS complications was a reduction of 17% in the incidence of pressure ulcers in the intervention sites compared to a 3% reduction in the control (p<0.001). In relation to the disease and health-related quality of life measures, the intervention group showed a small but significant (p<0.05) worsening in the physical and symptom scales of the SF36 compared to the control (mean differences: physical function -2.81, CI -5.45 to -0.1; bodily pain -4.09, CI -7.2 to -0.9; general health -5.35, CI -8.1 to -2.5; and energy and vitality -2.82, CI -5.5 to -0.1). No differences were observed in relation to disease impact or psychosocial well-being, although a relative benefit in mental health (with a 7.8 point advantage on the SF36 mental health scale, p=0.04) was observed in some of the intervention sites for people with relapsing/remitting MS.
                The specialist nurse programme was found to impact positively on the provision of MS-related health care. However, there was very limited evidence that the programme led to any improvements in disease-related problems, impact or health-related quality of life, These findings were in part explained by the inherent difficulties of measuring effects in evaluations of complex phenomena such as a nursing role. The deterioration observed in the intervention group on the physical outcome measures was explained by a selection bias in which people with worsening health were more likely to seek contact with a specialist nurse. It is contended that future research in this area may be better directed toward identifying specific interventions that nurses and other health professionals might employ in addressing the many problems confronting people with MS. Tackling health inequalities is high on the political agenda of the Labour government. The government wants to reduce inequalities through policies based on evidence, the health of childbearing women and their babies being priority areas for action. National Service Frameworks (NSFs) are being set up to ensure high quality services for all groups. The External Working Group looking into maternity services for the Children's NSF seeks evidence upon which to plan strategies for all women, while focusing attention on the most disadvantaged. Wide differentials are noted between high- and low-income groups in the outcomes of pregnancy and the health of babies. The worst outcomes appear to be concentrated in small subgroups of disadvantaged women.
                To report on a review of studies of interventions improving perinatal outcomes for disadvantaged women, to inform policy and practice around the organization and delivery of statutory services in the UK.
                We searched six relevant databases for reviews, intervention studies, audits and descriptions of services reporting outcomes for disadvantaged groups of women, published between 1990 and 2003. Synthesis was performed around what works and what does not work. Gaps in the evidence base were identified.
                We found limited evidence of effective and promising interventions for childbearing women from minority ethnic groups, women experiencing domestic violence, women with mental health illness and HIV infected women. Few studies were well-designed or powered to detect effectiveness. There were no studies of interventions for women prisoners, homeless women and travellers.
                Searching for intervention studies primarily by participant subgroup has brought in evidence from few well-designed studies on which to plan policy. Combining this approach with searching for intervention studies addressing behaviour like smoking, and needs like social support, may provide further evidence to tackle inequalities in the perinatal period. To compare outcomes of care from assertive community treatment teams with care by community mental health teams for people with serious mental illnesses.
                Non-blind randomised controlled trial.
                Two inner London boroughs.
                251 men and women under the care of adult secondary mental health services with recent high use of inpatient care and difficulties engaging with community services.
                Treatment from assertive community treatment team (127 participants) or continuation of care from community mental health team (124 participants).
                Primary outcome was inpatient bed use 18 months after randomisation. Secondary outcomes included symptoms, social function, client satisfaction, and engagement with services.
                No significant differences were found in inpatient bed use (median difference 1, 95% confidence interval -16 to 38) or in clinical or social outcomes for the two treatment groups. Clients who received care from the assertive community treatment team seemed better engaged (adapted homeless engagement acceptance schedule: difference in means 1.1, 1.0 to 1.9), and those who agreed to be interviewed were more satisfied with services (adapted client satisfaction questionnaire: difference in means 7.14, 0.9 to 13.4).
                Community mental health teams are able to support people with serious mental illnesses as effectively as assertive community treatment teams, but assertive community treatment may be better at engaging clients and may lead to greater satisfaction with services. Assertive community treatment (ACT) has been applied to a number of disorders in the adult population, such as schizophrenia, with some degree of success; its use in the treatment of people with intellectual disability (ID) and mental illness has received little attention. Despite the high costs of ID in health and social care, there has been very little evidence-based practice for people with ID and mental illness, and it remains a neglected area of research. Aims The aims of this study were an exploratory comparison of the effectiveness of an ACT model for the treatment of mental illness in people with ID (ACT-ID) with a standard community treatment (SCT-ID) approach.
                A Randomized controlled trial design was adopted and allocation was made by stratified randomization by an independent statistician. The prognostic factors used in the randomization were gender and psychiatric diagnosis (psychosis vs. affective). Service users were randomly allocated to either ACT-ID or SCT-ID.
                There were no statistically significant differences between ACT-ID and SCT-ID in terms of the level of unmet needs, carer burden, functioning and quality of life, but borderline evidence of a difference between treatment groups in quality of life in favour of SCT-ID. Both SCT-ID and ACT-ID groups decreased level of unmet needs and carer burden, and increased functioning. SCT-ID also led to a small increase in quality of life. Social support and family ties are strong predictors of functional recovery after stroke; however, development of successful psychosocial intervention programs has been difficult. This study examined whether a family-systems intervention designed to influence social support and self-efficacy affects functional outcome in older stroke patients.
                Two hundred ninety-one community-residing survivors of ischemic stroke or nontraumatic cerebral hemorrhage from eight acute-care hospitals and rehabilitation centers were randomized to either psychosocial intervention (PSI) or usual care (UC). PSI involved up to 16 sessions conducted in the home by a mental health worker. Functional recovery (measured by the Barthel Index [BI] at 6 months postrandomization, inability to assess functioning because of illness or death) was the primary end point.
                Functional recovery did not differ between UC and PSI in intention-to-treat analyses. In adjusted logistic regression, the odds of being functionally independent at 6 months was 60% higher in the intervention group, but this difference was not statistically significant (p = .31). Subgroup analyses revealed that PSI may be more effective in subjects with better psychologic and cognitive functioning and who required less inpatient rehabilitation.
                This study does not provide evidence for the efficacy of psychosocial intervention to improve functional recovery in stroke. Although PSI showed greater improvement than UC, the differences were not statistically significant. Drug abuse by people with severe mental disorder is a significant public health problem for which there is no empirically validated treatment.
                To evaluate the efficacy of a new behavioral treatment for drug abuse in this population: Behavioral Treatment for Substance Abuse in Severe and Persistent Mental Illness (BTSAS).
                Participants were randomly assigned to 6 months of treatment in either BTSAS or a manualized control condition: Supportive Treatment for Addiction Recovery (STAR).
                Treatment was conducted in community-based outpatient clinics and a Veterans Affairs medical center in Baltimore, Md.
                Participants were 129 stabilized outpatients meeting DSM criteria for drug dependence (cocaine, heroin, or cannabis) and serious mental illness: 39.5% met DSM-IV criteria for schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder; 55.8%, for major affective disorders; and the remainder met criteria for severe and persistent mental illness and other Axis I disorders.
                Both treatments were administered by trained health care professionals in small groups, twice a week for 6 months. The BTSAS program is a social learning intervention that includes motivational interviewing, a urinalysis contingency, and social skills training. The control condition, STAR, is a supportive group discussion treatment. Main Outcome Measure The primary outcome measure was urinalysis results from twice-weekly treatment sessions.
                The BTSAS program was significantly more effective than STAR in percentage of clean urine test results, survival in treatment, and attendance at sessions. The BTSAS program also had significant effects on important community-functioning variables, including hospitalization; money available for living expenses; and quality of life.
                The BTSAS program is an efficacious treatment. Further work needs to be done to increase the proportion of eligible patients who are able to become engaged in treatment. This RCT examined the efficacy of a manualized social intervention for children with HFASDs. Participants were randomly assigned to treatment or wait-list conditions. Treatment included instruction and therapeutic activities targeting social skills, face-emotion recognition, interest expansion, and interpretation of non-literal language. A response-cost program was applied to reduce problem behaviors and foster skills acquisition. Significant treatment effects were found for five of seven primary outcome measures (parent ratings and direct child measures). Secondary measures based on staff ratings (treatment group only) corroborated gains reported by parents. High levels of parent, child and staff satisfaction were reported, along with high levels of treatment fidelity. Standardized effect size estimates were primarily in the medium and large ranges and favored the treatment group. Evidence is accruing that older individuals receive little attention for mental health problems and that any attention that is given is most often within the primary care setting. A randomized clinical trial was carried out at a primary care clinic of The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, testing the ability of feedback of the results of a screening instrument (the General Health Questionnaire) to increase awareness in clinicians of the emotional and psychological problems of their patients. This report contrasts those aged 65 years and older with younger patients. Detection and management of mental morbidity were lower for older individuals, but the feedback intervention increased the likelihood of attention to these problems. This was not true for younger patients. Detection was significantly higher for older patients when screening data were made available, as was management, although the latter difference was not statistically significant. There was evidence as well that the intervention moved clinicians to greater congruence with their older patients in the perception that current mental health problems existed. These findings have important implications for primary care. To determine the effect of the Program for Assertive Community Treatment (PACT) model on psychiatric inpatient service use in a population of non-emergency psychiatric patients with severe chronic mental illness, and to test for variations in this effect with program staffing levels and patient characteristics such as race and age.
                Data are taken from a randomized trial of PACT in Charleston, South Carolina for 144 patients recruited from August 1989 through July 1991.
                Subjects were randomly assigned either to one of two PACT programs or to usual care at a local mental health center. Effects on hospital use were measured over an 18-month follow-up period via multiple regression analysis.
                Data were obtained from Medicaid claims, chart reviews, subject, case manager, and family interviews; searches of the computerized patient and financial databases of the South Carolina Department of Mental Health and relevant hospitals; and searches of the hard copy and computerized financial databases of the two major local hospitals providing inpatient psychiatric care.
                PACT participants were about 40 percent less likely to be hospitalized during the follow-up period. The effect was stronger for older patients. Lower PACT client/staff ratios also reduced the risk of hospitalization. No evidence of differential race effects was found. Given some hospital use, PACT did not influence the number of days of use.
                Controlling for other covariates, PACT significantly reduces hospitalizations but the size of this effect varies with patient and program characteristics. This study shows that previous results on PACT can be applied to non-emergency patients even when the control condition is an up-to-date CMHC office-based case management program. Valid reviews of the effects of mental health care depend on identifying as high a proportion as possible of relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). To investigate the sensitivity and precision both of MEDLINE and of hand-searching for RCTs in mental health, 12 journals specializing in mental health and indexed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) for MEDLINE were searched for the years 1971, 1976, 1981, 1986 and 1991. The sensitivity of the hand-search was 94% (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 93-95%), but it had a precision of only 7% (CI 6-8%). The optimal MEDLINE search had a sensitivity of only 52% (CI 48-56%) and a precision of 59% (CI 55-63%). Of the reports of RCTs identified by the hand-search, 9% (CI 7-11%) were not included in MEDLINE at all. Authors had included methodological descriptions in 84% (CI 80-88%) of RCTs found by the hand-search but missed by the MEDLINE search. Systematic reviews of mental health care which are based solely on MEDLINE searches of the literature will miss a large proportion of the relevant RCTs, and are thus liable to random error and bias. A register of mental health RCTs is urgently required.
We included 25 RCTs and found no compelling evidence to support any one psychosocial treatment over another to reduce substance use (or improve mental state) by people with serious mental illnesses. Furthermore, methodological difficulties exist which hinder pooling and interpreting results; high drop out rates, varying fidelity of interventions, varying outcome measures, settings and samples and comparison groups may have received higher levels of treatment than standard care. Further studies are required which address these concerns and improve the evidence in this important area.