Workplace trauma and professional quality of Life in clinical and forensic psychiatry: the CRITIC study.

Background: Frontline staff in psychiatry need to perform at a very high professional level in order to ensure patient and community safety. At the same time they are exposed to high levels of stress and workplace trauma. This may have severe consequences for their professional quality of life. In addition, health care workers in general have higher incidence levels of childhood adversity than the general population. The CRITIC (CRITical Incidents and aggression in Caregivers) Study aims to improve increased understanding of the interaction between personal life history (childhood adversity and benevolence), individual capabilities, exposure to trauma and violence at work and Professional Quality of Life (ProQOL). Method: The Critic Study is a cross-sectional survey of these aspects in frontline, treatment and administrative staff in clinical and forensic psychiatry. We aim to include 360 participants. Participants will be asked to complete questionnaires on childhood adversity and childhood benevolence (assessing personal life history), professional quality of life, current trauma and violence exposure, current mental health (depression, anxiety and stress), coping, social support, work engagement and resilience. In this study we will examine the moderating role of adverse and benevolent childhood experiences in the association between workplace trauma exposure and professional quality of life. Finally, a theoretical model on the relationships between trauma, stress and coping in the context of professional functioning will be tested using structural equation modelling. Discussion: The CRITIC study examines which factors influence the complex relationship between childhood adversity and benevolence, and ProQOL in healthcare workers. It also aims to provide insight into the complex relationship between personal life history, individual characteristics, exposure to trauma and violence at work and ProQOL. The results can be used for designing interventions to increase resilience to trauma and to improve professional quality of life among health care professionals. Trial registration: The CRITIC study has been approved by the Medical Ethical Committee of the Erasmus Medical Centre, under trial registration number NL73417.078.20.

Medical and social costs after using financial incentives to improve medication adherence: results of a 1 year randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Offering a financial incentive ('Money for Medication') is effective in improving adherence to treatment with depot antipsychotic medications. We investigated the cost-effectiveness in terms of medical costs and judicial expenses of using financial incentives to improve adherence. The effects of financial incentives on depot medication adherence were evaluated in a randomised controlled trial. Patients in the intervention group received €30 a month over 12 months if antipsychotic depot medication was accepted. The control group received mental health care as usual. For 133 patients outcomes were calculated based on self-reported service use and delinquent behaviour and expressed as standard unit costs to value resource use. RESULTS: The financial incentive resulted in higher average costs related to mental health care (€449.6 versus €355.7). and lower medical costs related to other healthcare services (€52.0 versus €78.4). Relevant differences in social costs related to delinquent behaviour were not found. Although wide confidence intervals indicate uncertainty, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio's (ICER) indicate that it costs €2080 for achieving a 20% increase in adherence or €3332 for achieving over 80% adherence. In sum, offering money as financial incentive for increasing compliance did not lead to an overall cost reduction as compared to care as usual. Trial registration NTR2350, 01 June 2010.

The effect of financial incentives on patients' motivation for treatment: results of "Money for Medication," a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Offering financial incentives is an effective intervention for improving adherence in patients taking antipsychotic depot medication. We assessed whether patients' motivation for treatment might be reduced after receiving financial rewards. METHODS: This study was part of Money for Medication, a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial, which demonstrated the positive effects of financial incentives on antipsychotic depot compliance. Three mental healthcare institutions in Dutch secondary psychiatric care services participated. Eligible patients were aged 18-65 years, had been diagnosed with schizophrenia or another psychotic disorder, had been prescribed antipsychotic depot medication or had an indication to start using depot medication, and were participating in outpatient treatment. For 12 months, patients were randomly assigned either to treatment as usual (control group) or to treatment as usual plus a financial reward for each depot of medication received (€30 per month if fully compliant; intervention group). They were followed up for 6 months, during which time no monetary rewards were offered for taking antipsychotic medication. To assess treatment motivation after 0, 12 and 18 months, interviews were conducted using a supplement to the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) and the Treatment Entry Questionnaire (TEQ). RESULTS: Patients were randomly assigned to the intervention (n = 84) or the control group (n = 85). After 12 months, HoNOS motivation scores were available for 131 patients (78%). Ninety-one percent of the patients had no or mild motivational problems for overall treatment; over time, there were no significant differences between the intervention and control groups. TEQ data was available for a subgroup of patients (n = 61), and showed no significant differences over time between the intervention and control groups for external motivation (ß = 0.37 95% CI: -2.49 - 3.23, p = 0.799); introjected motivation (ß = - 2.39 95% CI: -6.22 - 1.44, p = 0.222); and identified motivation (ß = - 0.91 95% CI: -4.42 - 2.61, p = 0.613). After the 6-month follow-up period, results for the HoNOS and TEQ scores remained comparable. CONCLUSIONS: Offering financial incentives for taking antipsychotic depot medication does not reduce patients' motivation for treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial registration, number NTR2350 .

Financial incentives for improving adherence to maintenance treatment in patients with psychotic disorders (Money for Medication): a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Provision of financial incentives is a promising intervention for improving adherence in patients taking antipsychotic medication. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of this intervention for improving adherence to antipsychotic depot medication in patients with psychotic disorders, irrespective of their previous compliance. METHODS: We did this multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial at three mental health-care institutions in secondary psychiatric care services in the Netherlands. Eligible patients were aged 18-65 years, had been diagnosed with schizophrenia or another psychotic disorder, had been prescribed antipsychotic depot medication or had an indication to start using depot medication, and were participating in outpatient treatment. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), via computer-generated randomisation with a block size of four, to receive 12 months of either treatment as usual plus a financial reward for each depot of medication received (€30 per month if fully compliant; intervention group) or treatment as usual alone (control group). Randomisation was stratified by treatment site and suspected prognostic factors: sex, comorbid substance-use disorder (absent vs present), and compliance with antipsychotic medication in the 4 months before baseline (<50% vs ≥50%). Patients, clinicians, interviewers, and research assistants were masked to group allocation before, but not after, group assignment. The primary outcome was the Medication Possession Ratio (MPR), defined as the number of depots of antipsychotic medication received divided by the total number of depots of antipsychotic medication prescribed during the 12 month intervention period. Patients were followed up for 6 months, during which time no monetary rewards were offered for taking antipsychotic medication. We did analysis by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the Nederlands Trial Register, number NTR2350. FINDINGS: Between May 21, 2010, and Oct 15, 2014, we randomly assigned 169 patients to the intervention group (n=84) or the control group (n=85). Primary outcome data were available for 155 (92%) patients. At baseline, the mean MPR was 76·0% (SD 28·2%) in the intervention group versus 77·9% (28·5%) in the control group. At 12 months, the mean MPR was higher in the intervention group (94·3% [SD 11·3%]) than in the control group (80·3% [19·1%]), with an adjusted difference of 14·9% (95% CI 8·9-20·9%; p<0·0001). This difference was maintained throughout the 6 month follow-up period: mean MPR of 86·6% (SD 22·2%) in the intervention group versus 76·0% (22·7%) in the control group (adjusted difference 6·5%, 95% CI 2·0-10·9; p=0·047). INTERPRETATION: Financial incentives are an effective way of improving adherence to antipsychotic depot medication among patients with psychotic disorders. Further research is needed to study the long-term effects of this intervention. FUNDING: Dual Diagnosis Center.