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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Potential predictive factors for successful referral from specialist mental-health services to less intensive treatment: A concept mapping study.

Referring patients from specialist mental-health services (provided by multiple healthcare service providers and aimed at relieving symptoms of mental illness) to less intensive care (provided by a nurse or psychologist in cooperation with a general practitioner and aimed at improving quality of life) is feasible from the perspective of patients, service providers, and mental-health services. However, it is unclear which patients are most suitable for referral to less intensive care. In this study, we used concept mapping to identify factors that might determine whether a referral from specialist mental services to less intensive care might be successful. Participants (N = 34) were recruited from different parts of the Netherlands and included general practitioners, peer workers, community mental-health nurses, and social workers from several services who were based in different neighborhoods. The participants generated 54 statements (31 after clean-up), which were sorted into five clusters and rated on their expected ability to predict successful referral. Ordered from highest to lowest on expected predictive value, the clusters of factors were: Patient characteristics, patients' informal support system, patients' social situation, organization of services, and service provider related factors. The ordering was the same for all of the service providers, except that general practitioners expected the organization of services to be the most predictive. The ordering of the clusters is mostly consistent with existing knowledge about recovery during mental healthcare. In order to further improve the number of successful referrals from specialist mental-health services to less intensive care, a prospective prediction study is needed.

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.

Childhood trauma and negative memory bias as shared risk factors for psychopathology and comorbidity in a naturalistic psychiatric patient sample.

BACKGROUND: Both childhood trauma and negative memory bias are associated with the onset and severity level of several psychiatric disorders, such as depression and anxiety disorders. Studies on these risk factors, however, generally use homogeneous noncomorbid samples. Hence, studies in naturalistic psychiatric samples are lacking. Moreover, we know little about the quantitative relationship between the frequency of traumatic childhood events, strength of memory bias and number of comorbid psychiatric disorders; the latter being an index of severity. The current study examined the association of childhood trauma and negative memory bias with psychopathology in a large naturalistic psychiatric patient sample. METHODS: Frequency of traumatic childhood events (emotional neglect, psychological-, physical- and sexual abuse) was assessed using a questionnaire in a sample of 252 adult psychiatric patients with no psychotic or bipolar-I disorder and no cognitive disorder as main diagnosis. Patients were diagnosed for DSM-IV Axis-I and Axis-II disorders using a structured clinical interview. This allowed for the assessment of comorbidity between disorders. Negative memory bias for verbal stimuli was measured using a computer task. RESULTS: Linear regression models revealed that the frequency of childhood trauma as well as negative memory bias was positively associated with psychiatric comorbidity, separately and above and beyond each other (all p < .01). CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that childhood trauma and negative memory bias may be of importance for a broader spectrum of psychiatric diagnoses, besides the frequently studied affective disorders. Importantly, frequently experiencing traumatic events during childhood increases the risk of comorbid psychiatric disorders.

The MATCH cohort study in the Netherlands: rationale, objectives, methods and baseline characteristics of patients with (long-term) common mental disorders.

Research in the last decades shows that common mental disorders may be long-term and severely disabling, resulting in severe mental illness (SMI). The percentage of Dutch SMI-patients with common mental disorders receiving mental health services is estimated at 65-70%. However, it is unclear which patients in fact become SMI-patients. We need to know more about the possible course of common mental disorders, understand the origins of chronicity in more detail, and have more insight in related care processes and care use of patients with common mental disorders. The MATCH cohort study is a four-year multicentre naturalistic cohort study, with yearly assessments in primary, secondary, and tertiary services in three large Dutch mental health services. Socio-demographics, mental disorders, course and severity of psychopathology, physiological health indicators, neurocognitive functioning, past and present life events, health care use and contact with mental health services, social functioning and quality of life, and recovery and well-being are assessed. Baseline findings of 283 participating individuals and their key clinicians are described. The sample appears to appropriately represent the distribution of individuals across diagnostic categories in services, and level of care (outpatient, day treatment, inpatient) in the Netherlands and other developed nations. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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.

Multidisciplinary, Nurse-Led Psychiatric Consultation in Nursing Homes: A Pilot Study in Clinical Practice.

PURPOSE: To determine the effects of multidisciplinary, nurse-led psychiatric consultation on behavioral problems of nursing home residents. Residents often suffer from psychiatric symptoms, while staff psychiatric expertise varies. DESIGN AND METHODS: A pre-post study was conducted in seven homes using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Nursing Home version (NPI-NH). FINDINGS: In 71 consultations during 18 months, 56-75% of residents suffered from agitation/aggression, depression, anxiety, and disinhibition. Post-intervention (n = 54), frequency, and severity of psychiatric symptoms were significantly and clinically meaningfully reduced. Also, staff suffered from less work stress. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Nurse-led psychiatric consultation is valuable to both nursing home residents and staff.

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.