Measuring the intensity of mental healthcare: development of the Mental Healthcare Intensity Scale (MHIS).

BACKGROUND: There are considerable differences among mental healthcare services, and especially in developed countries there are a substantial number of different services available. The intensity of mental healthcare has been an important variable in research studies (e.g. cohort studies or randomized controlled trials), yet it is difficult to measure or quantify, in part due to the fact that the intensity of mental healthcare results from a combination of several factors of a mental health service. In this article we describe the development of an instrument to measure the intensity of mental healthcare that is easy and fast to use in repeated measurements. METHODS: The Mental Healthcare Intensity Scale was developed in four stages. First, categories of care were formulated by using focus group interviews. Second, the fit among the categories was improved, and the results were discussed with a sample of the focus group participants. Third, the categories of care were ranked using the Segmented String Relative Rankings algorithm. Finally, the Mental Healthcare Intensity Scale was validated as a coherent classification instrument. RESULTS: 15 categories of care were formulated and were ranked on each of 12 different intensities of care. The Mental Healthcare Intensity Scale is a versatile questionnaire that takes 2-to-3 min to complete and yields a single variable that can be used in statistical analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The Mental Healthcare Intensity Scale is an instrument that can potentially be used in cohort studies and trials to measure the intensity of mental healthcare as a predictor of outcome. Further study into the psychometric characteristics of the Mental Healthcare Intensity Scale is needed.

Measuring personal recovery in a low-intensity community mental healthcare setting: validation of the Dutch version of the individual recovery outcomes counter (I.ROC).

BACKGROUND: Measuring progress in treatment is essential for systematic evaluation by service users and their care providers. In low-intensity community mental healthcare, a questionnaire to measure progress in treatment should be aimed at personal recovery and should require little effort to complete. METHODS: The Individual Recovery Outcome Counter (I.ROC) was translated from English into Dutch, and psychometric evaluations were performed. Data were collected on personal recovery (Recovery Assessment Scale), quality of life (Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of Life), and symptoms of mental illness and social functioning (Outcome Questionnaire, OQ-45) for assessing the validity of the I.ROC. Test-retest reliability was evaluated by calculating the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient and internal consistency was evaluated by calculating Cronbach's alpha. Exploratory factor analysis was performed to determine construct validity. To assess convergent validity, the I.ROC was compared to relevant questionnaires by calculating Pearson correlation coefficients. To evaluate discriminant validity, I.ROC scores of certain subgroups were compared using either a t-test or analysis of variance. RESULTS: There were 764 participants in this study who mostly completed more than one I.ROC (total n = 2,863). The I.ROC aimed to measure the concept of personal recovery as a whole, which was confirmed by a factor analysis. The test-retest reliability was satisfactory (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient is 0.856), as were the internal consistency (Cronbachs Alpha is 0.921) and the convergent validity. Sensitivity to change was small, but comparable to that of the OQ-45. CONCLUSIONS: The Dutch version of the I.ROC appears to have satisfactory psychometric properties to warrant its use in daily practice. Discriminant validity and sensitivity to change need further research.

Can social support be improved in people with a severe mental illness? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

People with a severe mental illness often have less social support than other people, yet these people need social support to face the challenges in their lives. Increasing social support could benefit the person's recovery, but it is not clear whether interventions that aim to improve social support in people with a severe mental illness are effective. A systematic literature search and review in MEDLINE (PubMed), PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane, JSTOR, IBSS, and Embase was performed. Studies were included if they had a control group and they were aimed at improving social support in people with a severe mental illness who were receiving outpatient treatment. Summary data were extracted from the research papers and compared in a meta-analysis by converting outcomes to effect sizes (Hedges's g). Eight studies (total n = 1538) that evaluated ten different interventions met the inclusion criteria. All but one of these studies was of sufficient quality to be included in the review. The studies that were included in the meta-analysis had a combined effect size of 0.17 (confidence interval: 0.02 to 0.32), indicating a small or no effect for the interventions that were evaluated. A subgroup analysis of more personalized studies showed a combined effect size of 0.35 (CI = 0.27 to 0.44), indicating a noteworthy effect for these more personalized studies. This evaluation of interventions aimed at improving social support in people with a severe mental illness suggests that these interventions in general have little or no clinical benefit. However, in a subgroup analysis the more personalized interventions have a larger effect on improving social support and merit further research.

Effectiveness and cost effectiveness of interpersonal community psychiatric treatment (ICPT) for people with long-term severe non-psychotic mental disorders: a multi-Centre randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Long-term community mental health treatment for non-psychotic disorder patients with severe mental illness (SMI) who are perceived as difficult by clinicians, is poorly developed and lacks a structured, goal-centred approach. This study compares (cost-)effectiveness of Interpersonal Community Psychiatric Treatment (ICPT) with Care As Usual (CAU) on quality of life and clinician perceived difficulty in the care for non-psychotic disorder SMI-patients. A multi-centre cluster-randomized clinical tria was conducted in which Community Mental Health Nurses (Clinicians) in three large community mental health services in the Netherlands were randomly allocated to providing either ICPT or CAU to included patients. A total of 56 clinicians were randomized, who treated a total of 93 patients (59 in ICPT-group and 34 in CAU-group). METHODS: Primary outcome measure is patient-perceived quality of life as measured by the Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of Life (MANSA). Secondary outcome measures include clinician-perceived difficulty, general mental health, treatment outcomes, illness management and recovery, therapeutic relationship, care needs and social network. Patients were assessed at baseline, during treatment (6 months), after treatment (12 months) and at 6 months follow-up (18 months). Linear mixed-effects models for repeated measurements were used to compare mean changes in primary and secondary outcomes between intervention and control group of patients over time on an intention to treat basis. Potential efficiency was investigated from a societal perspective. Economic evaluation was based on general principles of a cost-effectiveness analysis. Outcome measures for health economic evaluation, were costs, and Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). RESULTS: Half of the intended number of patients were recruited. There was no statistically significant treatment effect found in the MANSA (0.17, 95%-CI [- 0.058,0.431], p = 0.191). Treatment effects showed significant improvement in the Different Doctor-Patient Relationship Questionnaire-scores and a significant increase in the Illness Management and Recovery-scale Client-version scores). No effects of ICPT on societal and medical costs nor QALYs were found. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first RCT to investigate the (cost)-effectiveness of ICPT. Compared with CAU, ICPT did not improve quality of life, but significantly reduced clinician-perceived difficulty, and increased subjective illness management and recovery. No effects on costs or QALY's were found. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR 3988 , registered 13 May 2013.

Measuring Social Support in People with Mental Illness: A Quantitative Analysis of the Social Network Map.

An instrument is needed for quantitatively evaluating changes in social support in people with mental illness, but no gold standard is available. The Social Network Map is a structured interview for assessing social support that is used in individual care settings, yet provides overwhelming output (16-128 data points per assessment). A method comprising two factors (quality and quantity of the social network) was developed. The psychometric properties were judged to be sufficient. This study shows that data from the Social Network Map can be analysed at the group level, yet further research on the psychometric properties is needed.

A Qualitative Study of the Working Alliance between Patient and Community Mental Health Nurse during Interpersonal Community Psychiatric Treatment.

In the Netherlands, long-term community psychiatric treatment for patients with a severe mental illness (SMI) is poorly developed and lacks a structured, goal-centered approach. Often this form of treatment is provided by community mental health nurses (CMHN's).Especially in the group of nonpsychotic patients with SMI, it often leads to care-as-usual with limited proven interventions and an unstructured treatment. Interpersonal Community Psychiatric Treatment (ICPT) was developed to provide this group of patients a focus, a theoretical view, and a methodological structure. A pilot study has been conducted on ICPT. As a result, a randomized controlled trial (RCT) was recently conducted in which this study is part. The pilot study showed improvement on a number of treatment outcomes. However, the working alliance (WA) experienced by the patients, although not significant, was considered to be decreased. The aim of study was to gain insight into how the ICPT-elements shape the WA and the possible self-determination of patients in general.The main part of this mixed-methods study was a qualitative study with a Grounded Theory approach. For the selection of the participants, quantitative data from the current RCT has been used. Semistructured interviews have been conducted with 13 participants, divided over three mental health institutions throughout the Netherlands. Interviews and analysis were alternated, so that the interview topics were developed by constant comparison.Eleven participants were female and 11 participants received social benefit. Six of the participants were above 50 years of age. Four participants suffered either from a depressive or anxiety disorder. Seven participants had a borderline personality disorder. The results are linked to Bordin's theory of the therapeutic alliance, which is agreement on therapeutic tasks, agreement on therapeutic goals, and the quality of the personal bond. The WA could be analyzed from three different perspectives: mutually agreed on goals, tasks, and experienced interpersonal relationship. ICPT had limited influence on the mutually agreed on goals and interpersonal relationship but mainly on the mutually agreed on tasks. In daily practice, ICPT may have a positive influence on the perceived WA.The main factors that affected the perceived WA during ICPT were the tasks that had been mutually agreed on, the use of an agenda, the structure of the sessions, the alliance between the CMHN and the patient, and the patient's own self-determination. There was a limited influence on the mutually agreed on goals and the quality of the personal relationship between the CMHN and the patient. The present research revealed valuable information about the significance of the WA in ICPT and the opinions of the respondents about ICPT and information about what might be helpful or unhelpful in their relationship with their CMHN.

Suicide risk, personality disorder and hospital admission after assessment by psychiatric emergency services.

BACKGROUND: The main objectives of the mobile Psychiatric Emergency Services (PES) in the Netherlands are to assess the presence of a mental disorder, to estimate risk to self or others, and to initiate continuity of care, including psychiatric hospital admission. The aim of this study was to assess the associations between the level of suicidality and risk of voluntary or involuntary admission in patients with and without a personality disorder who were presented to mobile PES. METHODS: Observational data were obtained in three areas of the Netherlands from 2007 to 2016. In total, we included 71,707 contacts of patients aged 18 to 65 years. The outcome variable was voluntary or involuntary psychiatric admission. Suicide risk and personality disorder were assessed by PES-clinicians. Multivariable regression analysis was used to explore associations between suicide risk, personality disorder, and voluntary or involuntary admission. RESULTS: Independently of the level of suicide risk, suicidal patients diagnosed with personality disorder were less likely to be admitted voluntarily than those without such a diagnosis (admission rate .37 versus .46 respectively). However, when the level of suicide risk was moderate or high, those with a personality disorder who were admitted involuntarily had the same probability of involuntary admission as those without such a disorder. CONCLUSIONS: While the probability of voluntary admission was lower in those diagnosed with a personality disorder, independent of the level of suicidality, the probability of involuntary admission was only lower in those whose risk of suicide was low. Future longitudinal studies should investigate the associations between (involuntary) admission and course of suicidality in personality disorder.

Effectiveness of a self-management training for patients with chronic and treatment resistant anxiety or depressive disorders on quality of life, symptoms, and empowerment: results of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Anxiety and depressive disorders are common mental disorders. A substantial part of patients does not achieve symptomatic remission after treatment in specialized services. Current care as usual (CAU) for these patients consists of long-term supportive contacts. Termination of CAU is often not considered to be an option due to persistent symptoms, a low level of functioning, and the absence of further treatment options. A new intervention, ZemCAD, offers a program focused on rehabilitation and self-management, followed by referral back to primary care. METHODS: This multicenter randomized controlled trial was carried out in twelve specialized outpatient mental health care services in the Netherlands. Consenting and eligible patients were invited for the MINI interview and the baseline questionnaire. Assessments were done at 6 (T1), 12 (T2) and 18 (T3) months post baseline. We used linear mixed model analysis (LMM) to ascertain the effectiveness of the ZemCAD group relative to the CAU group on quality of life, symptom severity and empowerment. RESULTS: In total 141 patients were included. The results at 18-month follow-up regarding to quality of life and symptom severity, showed no significant differences between the ZemCAD group and the CAU group, except on the 'social relationships'-domain (d = 0.37). With regard to empowerment a significant difference between both groups was observed in the total empowerment score and one empowerment dimension (d = 0.45 and d = 0.39, respectively). After the ZemCAD intervention, more patients went from specialized outpatient mental health services back to a less specialized health care setting with less intensive treatment, such as primary care. CONCLUSION: The findings in this study suggest that patients with chronic and treatment-resistant anxiety and depression using the ZemCAD intervention improve on empowerment but not on symptom severity or quality of life. Since little is known about the effects of rehabilitation and self-management in patients with chronic and treatment resistant anxiety and depressive disorders, this is a first attempt to provide a proof-of-concept study in this under-researched but important field. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register: NTR3335 , registered 7 March 2012.

Long-Term Impact of a Tailored Seclusion Reduction Program: Evidence for Change?

International comparative studies show that Dutch seclusion rates are relatively high. Therefore, several programs to change this practice were developed and implemented. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of a seclusion reduction program over a long time frame, from 2004 until 2013. Three phases could be identified; the phase of development and implementation of the program (2004-2007), the project phase (2008-2010) and the consolidation phase (2011-2013). Five inpatient wards of a mental health institute were monitored. Each ward had one or more seclusion rooms. Primary outcome were the number and the duration of seclusion incidents. Involuntary medication was monitored as well to rule out substitution of one coercive measure by another. Case mix correction for patient characteristics was done by a multi-level logistic regression analysis with patient characteristics as predictors and hours seclusion per admission hours as outcome. Seclusion use reduced significantly during the project phase, both in number (-73%) and duration (-80%) and was not substituted by the use of enforced medication. Patient compilation as analyzed by the multi- level regression seemed not to confound the findings. Findings show a slight increase in number and seclusion days over the last year of monitoring. Whether this should be interpreted as a continuous or temporary trend remains unclear and is subject for further investigation.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a self-management training for patients with chronic and treatment resistant anxiety or depressive disorders: design of a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with anxiety or depressive disorders achieve no remission of their symptoms after evidence-based treatment algorithms. They develop a chronic course of the disorder. Current care for these patients usually consists of long-term supportive contacts with a community psychiatric nurse and pharmacological management by a psychiatrist. Data on the effectiveness of these treatments is lacking. A psychosocial rehabilitation approach, where self-management is an increasingly important part, could be more suitable. It focuses on the restoration of functioning and enhancement of patients' autonomy and responsibility. Treatment with this focus, followed by referral to primary care, may be more (cost-)effective. METHODS: A multicenter randomized controlled trial is designed for twelve participating specialized outpatient mental health services in the Netherlands. Patients with chronic and treatment resistant anxiety or depressive disorders, currently receiving supportive care in specialized outpatient mental health care, are asked to participate. After inclusion, patients receive the baseline questionnaire and are randomized to the intervention group or the usual care control group. The intervention focuses on rehabilitation and self-management and is provided by a trained community psychiatric nurse, followed by referral to primary care. Measurements take place at 6, 12, and 18 months after baseline. This study evaluates both the effectiveness (on quality of life, symptom severity, and empowerment), and cost-effectiveness of the intervention compared to usual care. In addition, a questionnaire is designed to get insight in which self-management strategies patients use to manage their disorder, and in the experiences of patients with the change of care setting. DISCUSSION: In this study we evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a self-management intervention for patients with chronic and treatment resistant anxiety or depressive disorders in specialized outpatient mental health care. The results of this study may provide a first 'proof-of-concept' in this under-researched but important field, and might be relevant for a large group of patients in the context of a transition of the Dutch health care system. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register: NTR3335 , registered 7 March 2012.

Cost effectiveness of interpersonal community psychiatric treatment for people with long-term severe non-psychotic mental disorders: protocol of a multi-centre randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: This study aims for health gain and cost reduction in the care for people with long-term non-psychotic psychiatric disorders. Present care for this population has a limited evidence base, is often open ended, little effective, and expensive. Recent epidemiological data shows that 43.5% of the Dutch are affected by mental illness during their life. About 80% of all patients receiving mental health services (MHS) have one or more non-psychotic disorders. Particularly for this group, long-term treatment and care is poorly developed. Care As Usual (CAU) currently is a form of low-structured treatment/care. Interpersonal Community Psychiatric Treatment (ICPT) is a structured treatment for people with long-term, non-psychotic disorders, developed together with patients, professionals, and experts. ICPT uses a number of evidence-based techniques and was positively evaluated in a controlled pilot study. METHODS/DESIGN: Multi-centre cluster-randomized clinical trial: 36 professionals will be randomly allocated to either ICPT or CAU for an intervention period of 12 months, and a follow-up of 6 months. 180 Patients between 18-65 years of age will be included, who have been diagnosed with a non-psychotic psychiatric disorder (depressive, anxiety, personality or substance abuse disorder), have long-term (>2 years) or high care use (>1 outpatient contact per week or >2 crisis contacts per year or >1 inpatient admission per year), and who receive treatment in a specialized mental health care setting. The primary outcome variable is quality of life; secondary outcomes are costs, recovery, general mental health, therapeutic alliance, professional-perceived difficulty of patient, care needs and social contacts. DISCUSSION: No RCT, nor cost-effectiveness study, has been conducted on ICPT so far. The empirical base for current CAU is weak, if not absent. This study will fill this void, and generate data needed to improve daily mental health care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register (NTR): 3988 . Registered 13th of May 2013.

Improving communication and practical skills in working with inpatients who self-harm: a pre-test/post-test study of the effects of a training programme.

BACKGROUND: Differing perspectives of self-harm may result in a struggle between patients and treatment staff. As a consequence, both sides have difficulty communicating effectively about the underlying problems and feelings surrounding self-harm. Between 2009 and 2011, a programme was developed and implemented to train mental health care staff (nurses, social workers, psychologists, psychiatrists, and occupational therapists) in how to communicate effectively with and care for patients who self-harm. An art exhibition focusing on self-harm supported the programme. Lay experts in self-harm, i.e. people who currently harm themselves, or who have harmed themselves in the past and have the skills to disseminate their knowledge and experience, played an important role throughout the programme. METHODS: Paired sample t-tests were conducted to measure the effects of the training programme using the Attitude Towards Deliberate Self-Harm Questionnaire, the Self-Perceived Efficacy in Dealing with Self-Harm Questionnaire, and the Patient Contact Questionnaire. Effect sizes were calculated using r. Participants evaluated the training programme with the help of a survey. The questionnaires used in the survey were analysed descriptively. RESULTS: Of the 281 persons who followed the training programme, 178 completed the questionnaires. The results show a significant increase in the total scores of the three questionnaires, with large to moderate effect sizes. Respondents were positive about the training, especially about the role of the lay expert. CONCLUSION: A specialised training programme in how to care for patients who self-harm can result in a more positive attitude towards self-harm patients, an improved self-efficacy in caring for patients who self-harm, and a greater closeness with the patients. The deployment of lay experts is essential here.

Suicidal Behavior and Difficulty of Patients, as Perceived by Community Mental Health Nurses.

BACKGROUND: Mental health professionals who work in community mental health services play an important role in treating patients after attempted suicide or deliberate self-injury. When such behaviors are interpreted negatively, patients may be seen as difficult, which may lead to ineffective treatment and mutual misunderstanding. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to assess the association between the grading of suicidality and perceived difficulty. We hypothesized that a higher grading of suicidality is associated with increased perceived difficulty. METHODS: We analyzed cross-sectional data from 176 patients who participated in 2 cohort studies: 92 patients in the MATCH-cohort study and 84 patients in the Interpersonal Community Psychiatric Treatment (ICPT) study. The dependent variable was perceived difficulty, as measured by the Difficult Doctor-Patient Relationship Questionnaire (DDPRQ) and the Difficulty Single-item (DSI), a single item measuring the difficulty of the patient as perceived by the professional. Grading of suicidality was considered as the independent variable. Multiple linear and logistic regression was performed. RESULTS: We found a significant association between perceived difficulty (DDPRQ) and high gradings of suicidality (B: 3.96; SE: 1.44; ß: 0.21; P=0.006), increasing age (B: 0.09; SE: 0.03; ß: 0.22; P<0.003), sex (female) (B: 2.33; SE: 0.83; ß: 0.20; P=0.006), and marital status (being unmarried) (B: 1.92; SE: 0.85; ß: 0.17; P=0.025). A significant association was also found between the DSI and moderate (odds ratio: 3.04; 95% CI: 1.355-6.854; P=0.007) and high (odds ratio: 7.11; 95% CI: 1.8.43-24.435; P=0.005) gradings of suicidality. CONCLUSION: In this study, we found that perceived difficulty was significantly associated with moderate and high gradings of suicidality, increasing age, female sex, and being unmarried.

Development and Validation of the 'Self-Efficacy in Dealing with Self-Harm Questionnaire' (SEDSHQ).

Clinicians find it challenging to engage with patients who engage in self-harm. Improving the self-efficacy of professionals who treat self-harm patients may be an important step toward accomplishing better treatment of self-harm. However, there is no instrument available that assesses the self-efficacy of clinicians dealing with self-harm. The aim of this study is to describe the development and validation of the Self-Efficacy in Dealing with Self-Harm Questionnaire (SEDSHQ). This study tests the questionnaire's feasibility, test-retest reliability, internal consistency, content validity, construct validity (factor analysis and convergent validity) and sensitivity to change. The Self-Efficacy in Dealing with Self-Harm Questionnaire is a 27-item instrument which has a 3-factor structure, as found in confirmatory factor analysis. Testing revealed high content validity, significant correlation with a subscale of the Attitude Towards Deliberate Self-Harm Questionnaire (ADSHQ), satisfactory test-retest correlation and a Cronbach's alpha of 0.95. Additionally, the questionnaire was able to measure significant changes after an intervention took place, indicating sensitivity to change. We conclude that the present study indicates that the Self-Efficacy in Dealing with Self-Harm Questionnaire is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing the level of self-efficacy in response to self-harm.

Collaborative Care for patients with severe borderline and NOS personality disorders: a comparative multiple case study on processes and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Structured psychotherapy is recommended as the preferred treatment of personality disorders. A substantial group of patients, however, has no access to these therapies or does not benefit. For those patients who have no (longer) access to psychotherapy a Collaborative Care Program (CCP) is developed. Collaborative Care originated in somatic health care to increase shared decision making and to enhance self management skills of chronic patients. Nurses have a prominent position in CCP's as they are responsible for optimal continuity and coordination of care. The aim of the CCP is to improve quality of life and self management skills, and reduce destructive behaviour and other manifestations of the personality disorder. METHODS/DESIGN: Quantitative and qualitative data are combined in a comparative multiple case study. This makes it possible to test the feasibility of the CCP, and also provides insight into the preliminary outcomes of CCP. Two treatment conditions will be compared, one in which the CCP is provided, the other in which Care as Usual is offered. In both conditions 16 patients will be included. The perspectives of patients, their informal carers and nurses are integrated in this study. Data (questionnaires, documents, and interviews) will be collected among these three groups of participants. The process of treatment and care within both research conditions is described with qualitative research methods. Additional quantitative data provide insight in the preliminary results of the CCP compared to CAU. With a stepped analysis plan the 'black box' of the application of the program will be revealed in order to understand which characteristics and influencing factors are indicative for positive or negative outcomes. DISCUSSION: The present study is, as to the best of our knowledge, the first to examine Collaborative Care for patients with severe personality disorders receiving outpatient mental health care. With the chosen design we want to examine how and which elements of the CC Program could contribute to a better quality of life for the patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register (NTR): NTR2763.

Ambivalent connections: a qualitative study of the care experiences of non-psychotic chronic patients who are perceived as 'difficult' by professionals.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the perspectives of psychiatric patients who are perceived as 'difficult' by clinicians. The aim of this paper is to improve understanding of the connections between patients and professionals from patients' point of view. METHODS: A Grounded Theory study using interviews with 21 patients from 12 outpatient departments of three mental health care facilities. RESULTS: Patients reported on their own difficult behaviours and their difficulties with clinicians and services. Explanations varied but could be summarized as a perceived lack of recognition. Recognition referred to being seen as a patient and a person - not just as completely 'ill' or as completely 'healthy'. Also, we found that patients and professionals have very different expectations of one another, which may culminate in a difficult or ambivalent connection. In order to explicate patient's expectations, the patient-clinician contact was described by a stage model that differentiates between three stages of contact development, and three stages of substantial treatment. According to patients, in each stage there is a therapeutic window of optimal clinician behaviour and two wider spaces below and above that may be qualified as 'toxic' behaviour. Possible changes in clinicians' responses to 'difficult' patients were described using this model. CONCLUSIONS: The incongruence of patients' and professionals' expectations may result in power struggles that may make professionals perceive patients as 'difficult'. Explication of mutual expectations may be useful in such cases. The presented model gives some directions to clinicians how to do this.

Delphi research exploring essential components and preconditions for case management in people with dementia.

BACKGROUND: Case management programmes for home-dwelling people with dementia and their informal carers exist in multiple forms and shapes. The aim of this research was to identify the essential components of case management for people with dementia as well as the preconditions for an effective delivery of case management services. METHOD: The method used to carry out the research was a modified four-phase Delphi design. First, a list of potentially essential components and preconditions for the provision of case management was drawn up on the basis of a literature review and a subsequent focus group interview. The list was then validated by experts in a first Delphi survey round, following which the researchers translated the list items into 75 statements. In the second Delphi survey, the experts rated the statements; in the third Delphi round, they rated 18 statements on which no consensus had been reached in the second round. RESULTS: The experts were able to build consensus on 61 of the 75 statements. Essential components of case management for people with dementia are: information, support and counselling, coordination of the care provided and, to a lesser extent, practical help. A patient-centred approach was found to be one of the key aspects of providing case management services. Essential preconditions are: vision, care relationship, structured methodology, integration of case management into the health care chain, and the case manager's level of training and expertise. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend that, based on the essential components and preconditions referred to above, quality criteria be developed for the provision of case management for people with dementia. Furthermore, we suggest the conduct of additional research to assess the effectiveness of case management in people with dementia.

Development of an intervention program to increase effective behaviours by patients and clinicians in psychiatric services: Intervention Mapping study.

BACKGROUND: Health clinicians perceive certain patients as 'difficult' across all settings, including mental health care. In this area, patients with non-psychotic disorders that become long-term care users may be perceived as obstructing their own recovery or seeking secondary gain. This negative perception of patients results in ineffective responses and low-quality care by health clinicians. Using the concept of illness behaviour, this paper describes the development, implementation, and planned evaluation of a structured intervention aimed at prevention and management of ineffective behaviours by long-term non-psychotic patients and their treating clinicians. METHODS: The principles of Intervention Mapping were applied to guide the development, implementation, and planned evaluation of the intervention. Qualitative (individual and group interviews), quantitative (survey), and mixed methods (Delphi-procedure) research was used to gain a broad perspective of the problem. Empirical findings, theoretical models, and existing evidence were combined to construct a program tailored to the needs of the target groups. RESULTS: A structured program to increase effective illness behaviour in long-term non-psychotic patients and effective professional behaviour in their treating clinicians was developed, consisting of three subsequent stages and four substantial components, that is described in detail. Implementation took place and evaluation of the intervention is being carried out. CONCLUSIONS: Intervention Mapping proved to be a suitable method to develop a structured intervention for a multi-faceted problem in mental health care.

Substituting specialist care for patients with severe mental illness with primary healthcare. Experiences in a mixed methods study.

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Care planning and coordination are currently insufficiently based on scientific insights due to a lack of knowledge on this topic. Most patients with severe mental illness receive long-term treatment from specialized mental health services. This long-term, highly intensive treatment is not always the best option for two reasons. Firstly, because as long as a patient receives intensive treatment aimed at safety, it is hard for that patient to take full responsibility for their own life. Secondly, because care is not available unlimitedly, some patients are waiting to receive specialist mental healthcare while others who do not need it anymore still receive it. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: Most stable patients with severe mental illness can be treated outside of specialized mental health services. Some patients are too dependent on a specific mental healthcare professional to be referred to primary healthcare. In such instances, a referral will most likely lead to destabilization and the referral will therefore be unsuccessful. Patients preferred primary healthcare to specialized mental health services, mainly because of the absence of stigma associated with the latter. There should be more attention for personal recovery (especially the social support system) of patients with severe mental illness who are referred to primary healthcare services. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: Most stable patients with severe mental illness can be treated in primary healthcare. Professionals in primary healthcare should keep personal recovery in mind when treating patients, focusing on problem solving skills and also making use of social support systems. ABSTRACT: Aim/question Care planning and coordination are currently insufficiently based on scientific insights due to a lack of knowledge on this topic. In the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, most patients with severe mental illness receive long-term specialized mental healthcare, even when they are stable. This study aims to explore the outcome of these stable patients when they are referred to primary healthcare. Methods Patients (N = 32) receiving specialized mental healthcare that were referred to primary healthcare were interviewed in focus groups, as were the involved professionals (N = 6). Results 84% of the participants still received primary healthcare after 12 months. Despite the successful referral, the patient's personal recovery did not always profit. The participants of the focus groups agreed that some patients were too dependent on a specific mental healthcare professional to be referred to primary healthcare. Discussion Most stable patients with severe mental illness can be referred to primary healthcare. Personal recovery and dependency on a specific healthcare provider should be considered when referring a patient to primary healthcare. Implications for practice Professionals in community mental healthcare teams should consider a referral to primary mental healthcare in stable patients. Professionals in primary healthcare should keep the patient's personal recovery in mind.

Clinical problems in the long-term care of patients with chronic depression.

AIM: This paper is a report of a study to explore problems encountered by mental health professionals in the long-term care of patients with chronic depression. BACKGROUND: Patients who do not profit from psychopharmacological or psychotherapeutic treatment often need long-term care. Although they experience severe symptoms and loss of functioning, little is known about these people and the care they receive. METHOD: Experts in chronic depression (n = 8) participated in a four-phase Delphi study in 2006-2007. Problems were elicited through a focus group interview (first round) which was analysed using thematic analysis. The resulting problem list was validated (second round) and scored twice on a 7-point Likert scale (third and fourth rounds) by the participants. Urgency and changeability scores of 35 problems were obtained and a hierarchy of problems was set. In addition, qualitative data from the focus group interview were used to frame the results in the context of long-term care for patients with chronic depression. RESULTS: Problems were subdivided into five areas. Relapses by the patient, a pessimistic attitude by the professional and demoralization in both were major problems. Also noted were the negative societal connotations of chronic depression and the lack of a coherent view on treatment within mental health care. CONCLUSION: Chronicity of depression may be denied by both patients and professionals, resulting in an overly strong focus on cure and a limited quality of care. The results may be used as a starting point for construction of a best-practice programme to improve long-term care.