Background: The present study investigates the suitability of various treatment outcome indicators to evaluate performance of mental health institutions that provide care to patients with severe mental illness. Several categorical approaches are compared to a reference indicator (continuous outcome) using pretest-posttest data of the Health of Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS). Methods: Data from 10 institutions and 3189 patients were used, comprising outcomes of the first year of treatment by teams providing long-term care. Results: Findings revealed differences between continuous indicators (standardized pre-post difference score ES and ΔT) and categorical indicators (SEM, JTRCI, JTCS, JTRCI&CS, JTrevised) on their ranking of institutions, as well as substantial differences among categorical indicators; the outcome according to the traditional JT approach was most concordant with the continuous outcome indicators. Conclusions: For research comparing group averages, a continuous outcome indicator such as ES or ΔT is preferred, as this best preserves information from the original variable. Categorical outcomes can be used to illustrate what is accomplished in clinical terms. For categorical outcome, the classical Jacobson-Truax approach is preferred over the more complex method of Parabiaghi et al. with eight outcome categories. The latter may be valuable in clinical practice as it allows for a more detailed characterization of individual patients.
DOCUMENT
Objective: A key aspect of psychiatric rehabilitation is supporting individuals with serious mental illness in reaching personal goals. This study aimed to investigate whether various aspects of the working alliance predict successful goal attainment and whether goal attainment improves subjective quality of life, independent of the ehabilitation approach used. Methods: Secondary analyses were conducted of data from a Dutch randomized clinical trial on goal attainment by individuals supported with the Boston University approach to psychiatric rehabilitation (N=80) or a generic approach (N=76). Working alliance was measured with the Working Alliance Inventory (WAI) from the practitioner’s perspective. Rehabilitation practitioners had backgrounds in social work, nursing, or vocational rehabilitation. Multiple logistic regression and multiple regression analyses explored effects of working alliance on goal attainment and of goal attainment on subjective quality of life at 24 months. Analyses were controlled for client- and process-related predictors, baseline quality of life, and rehabilitation approach. Results: The WAI goal subscale predicted goal attainment at 24 months. No effect was found for the bond or task subscale. Goal attainment significantly predicted quality of life at 24 months. These effects were independent of the rehabilitation approach used. Conclusions: A good bond between client and practitioner is not enough to attain successful rehabilitation outcomes. Findings suggest that it is important to discuss clients’ wishes and ambitions and form an agreement on goals. Attaining rehabilitation goals directly influenced the subjective quality of life of individuals with serious mental illness, which underscores the importance of investing in these forms of client support.
MULTIFILE
Background: People with severe mental illnesses (SMIs) have difficulty participating in society through work or other daily activities. Aims: To establish the effectiveness with which the Boston University Approach to Psychiatric Rehabilitation (BPR) improves the level of social participation in people with SMIs, in the Netherlands. Method: In a randomized controlled trial involving 188 people with SMIs, we compared BPR (n = 98) with an Active Control Condition (ACC, n = 90) (Trial registration ISRCTN88987322). Multilevel modeling was used to study intervention effects over two six-month periods. The primary outcome measure was level of social participation, expressed as having participated in paid or unpaid employment over the past six months, as the total hours spent in paid or unpaid employment, and as the current level of social participation. Secondary outcome measures were clients’ views on rehabilitation goal attainment, Quality of Life (QOL), personal recovery, self-efficacy, and psychosocial functioning. Results: During the study, social participation, QOL, and psychosocial functioning improved in patients in both groups. However, BPR was not more effective than ACC on any of the outcomes. Better social participation was predicted by previous work experience and a lower intensity of psychiatric symptoms. Conclusions: While ACC was as effective as BPR in improving the social participation of individuals with SMIs, much higher percentages of participants in our sample found (paid) work or other meaningful activities than in observational studies without specific support for social participation. This suggests that focused rehabilitation efforts are beneficial, irrespective of the specific methodology used.
DOCUMENT
