The role of migration in mental healthcare: treatment satisfaction and utilization.

Migration rates increase globally and require an adaption of national mental health services to the needs of persons with migration background. Therefore, we aimed to identify differences between persons with and without migratory background regarding (1) treatment satisfaction, (2) needed and received mental healthcare and (3) utilization of mental healthcare.In the context of a cross-sectional multicenter study, inpatients and day hospital patients of psychiatric settings in Southern Germany with severe affective and non-affective psychoses were included. Patients' satisfaction with and their use of mental healthcare services were assessed by VSSS-54 and CSSRI-EU; patients' needs were measured via CAN-EU.In total, 387 participants (migratory background: n = 72; 19%) provided sufficient responses for analyses. Migrant patients were more satisfied with the overall treatment in the past year compared to non-migrant patients. No differences between both groups were identified in met and unmet treatment needs and use of supply services (psychiatric, psychotherapeutic, and psychosocial treatment).Despite a comparable degree of met and unmet treatment needs and mental health service use among migrants and non-migrants, patients with migration background showed higher overall treatment satisfaction compared to non-migrants. The role of sociocultural and migrant-related factors may explain our findings.

[Quality Indicators for Integrated Care in Patients with Schizophrenia - Results from a Feasibility Study]. / Qualitätsindikatoren für die Behandlung von Menschen mit Schizophrenie ­ Ergebnisse einer Anwendungsstudie.

Objective The study aimed to evaluate the applicability of a set of quality indicators to assess models of integrated care for patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia. We report first values for these indicators in routine care in Germany. Methods The study is based on a cohort of adult patients with schizophrenia insured by one large German statutory health insurance company, which were assessed two times and gave consent to evaluate their routine claims data. The study tried to use 12 basic and 22 quality indicators from claims data. Results It was possible to estimate most structural indicators using available data, but only half of the quality indicators. This means that while assessment of quality indicators is feasible in general, routine claims data needs to be supplemented by additional (primary) data. Four of the calculated quality indicators had clear targets or red-flag values, which were not met in our cohort in all four indicators. None of the patients had an outpatient mental health related contact within one week (target > 90 %). The readmission rate within 30 days (21 %) was twice as high as the proposed red-flag value of 10 %. Similar figures were seen for antipsychotic polypharmacy (25 %, red-flag value > 10 %) and the proportion of patients with compulsory treatment (15 %) exceeded the red-flag value by 5 %. Conclusion The study shows that it is possible to measure quality indicators, but also demonstrates considerable limitations. There is a need to validate indicators in routine care.