Effects of the Personalized Recovery Oriented Services (PROS) Program on Hospitalizations.

Though the recovery model has been implemented widely in outpatient mental health settings, there are no large sample evaluations of recovery oriented psychiatric rehabilitation programs that address both serious mental illness (SMI) and co-occurring disorders (COD) using a more comprehensive Medicaid reimbursable approach. This study examined preliminary hospitalization outcomes, for adults with SMI and COD enrolled in the NYS Personalized Recovery Oriented Services (PROS) program. McNemar's chi-square test was used to examine changes in hospitalization rates from pre-PROS admission to post-PROS discharge in a sample of 12,006 adults discharged from PROS. Negative binomial regression models were used to calculate adjusted rates of hospitalizations and hospital days. Demographic, psychosocial, and diagnosis predictor variables were extracted from the OMH web-based Child and Adult Integrated Reporting System. Hospitalization data were extracted from the Mental Health Automated Recordkeeping System, and Medicaid. From pre-admission to post-discharge, psychiatric hospitalization rate decreased significantly, from 24% to 14%. Substance related hospitalizations also decreased significantly, from 5% to 3%. Average number of hospitalizations and number of days hospitalized decreased even after adjusting for sociodemographic factors. PROS serves a high number of COD patients, and the number of psychiatric and substance related hospitalizations decreased after an episode of PROS, as did the number of days hospitalized. Findings support the maintenance of psychiatric rehabilitation models that include recovery oriented components. Further analyses with control samples are proposed.

Use of intervention strategies by assertive community treatment teams to promote patients' engagement.

OBJECTIVE: This study explored the range of interventions and the use of more intrusive techniques by staff of assertive community treatment (ACT) teams to promote engagement, manage problem behaviors, and reinforce positive behaviors among patients. Individual and organizational characteristics that may be associated with these practices were identified. METHODS: Between January and March 2006, clinicians (N=239) from 34 ACT teams participated in a one-time survey about their intervention strategies with patients, perceptions about the ACT team environment, and beliefs about persons with severe mental illness. RESULTS: Significant variation existed in the types of interventions employed across teams. The less intrusive strategies, including positive inducements and verbal guidance, were the most common. Other strategies that placed limits on patients but that were still considered less intrusive-such as medication monitoring and money management-were also common. Clinicians who reported working in more demoralized climates and having negative perceptions of mental illness were more likely to endorse leveraged or intrusive interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study suggest significant variation across teams in the use of intervention strategies. Both perceptions of a demoralized organizational climate and stigmatizing beliefs about mental illness were correlated with the use of more intrusive intervention strategies. Future research on the role and appropriateness of more intrusive interventions in mental health treatment and the impact of such interventions on patient outcomes is warranted.