Rehospitalisation rates after long-term follow-up of patients with severe mental illness admitted for more than one year: a systematic review.

AIMS: This study aimed to conduct a systematic review of studies on the outcomes of long-term hospitalisation of individuals with severe mental illness, considering readmission rates as the primary outcome. METHODS: Studies considered were those in which participants were aged between 18 and 64 years with severe mental illness; exposure to psychiatric hospitals or wards was long-term (more than one year); primary outcomes were readmission rates; secondary outcomes were duration of readmission, employment, schooling, and social participation; and the study design was either observational or interventional with a randomised controlled trial (RCT) design. Relevant studies were searched using MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, and the Japan Medical Abstract Society. The final search was conducted on 1 February 2022. The risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions was used to assess the methodological quality. A descriptive literature review is also conducted. RESULTS: Of the 11,999 studies initially searched, three cohort studies (2,293 participants) met the eligibility criteria. The risk of bias in these studies was rated as critical or serious. The 1-10 years readmission rate for patients with schizophrenia who had been hospitalised for more than one year ranged from 33 to 55%. The average of readmission durations described in the two studies was 70.5 ± 95.6 days per year (in the case of a 7.5-year follow-up) and 306 ± 399 days (in the case of a 3-8-year follow-up). None of the studies reported other outcomes defined in this study. CONCLUSIONS: The readmission rates in the included studies varied. Differences in the follow-up period or the intensity of community services may have contributed to this variability. In countries preparing to implement de-institutionalisation, highly individualised community support should be designed to avoid relocation to residential services under supervision. The length of stay for readmissions was shorter than that for index admissions. The results also imply that discharge to the community contributes to improved clinical outcomes such as improved social functioning. The validity of retaining patients admitted because of the risk of rehospitalisation was considered low. Future research directions have also been discussed.

Influence of multi-aspect job preference matching on job tenure for people with mental disorders in supported employment programs in Japan.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the association between job tenure and job preference matching for five job preference domains for people with mental disorders enrolled in Individual Placement and Support (IPS) programs in Japan. The domains include occupation type, monthly income, weekly work hours, commute time, and illness disclosure. METHODS: We conducted secondary analysis of participants who obtained employment in a longitudinal study during the 24-month follow-up period at 16 agencies routinely providing IPS programs. We included 112 participants who expressed job preferences and were employed at least once. A total of 130 employment cases were analyzed. Matches in the five domains were determined using participants' job preferences and employment information. The Match Level (0-5) indicates the number of domains that match the participant's job preferences. Job tenure (weeks worked) was compared between the matched and unmatched groups in each domain and between each match levels using linear regression mixed-effects models. RESULTS: A match for a given domain did not show a significant relationship with job tenure, whereas Match Levels 3 (B = 29.6, 95% CI [10.8, 48.4], p = .003) and 4 (B = 37.0, 95% CI [17.1, 56.9], p < .001) had a significantly longer tenure than those with Match Level 1. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: A higher match level may be related to a longer job tenure. The results suggest that employment specialists should prioritize clients' preferences in job searches. Further replication studies in other settings and countries should be conducted to verify the findings in this study. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

What outcomes in community mental health research are important to caregivers of people with schizophrenia? An exploratory qualitative analysis of an online survey.

AIMS: This study investigated outcomes in community mental health research that were important to caregivers of people with schizophrenia. METHODS: Using an online survey conducted from August 1 to 31, 2020, data were collected from caregivers belonging to the LINE Schizophrenia Family Association. Caregivers identified outcomes important in community mental health research. Two researchers categorized caregivers' statements into research outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 132 caregivers completed the online selfreported questionnaire, and 296 caregiver statements were identified. Qualitative analysis identified 17 outcome categories. The caregivers tended to value having more free time, maintaining an appropriate relationship with people with schizophrenia, and being able to cope with their symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory study newly demonstrates the outcomes that caregivers of people with schizophrenia consider important in community mental health research. The findings may be useful in selecting outcomes for future studies of caregivers.

Multiple stakeholders' perspectives on patient and public involvement in community mental health services research: A qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patient and public involvement (PPI) has become essential in health research. However, little is known about multiple stakeholders' perspectives on the implementation of PPI in community mental health research settings. The present study aimed to qualitatively analyse multiple stakeholders' views on PPI, including potential concerns, barriers and approaches. METHODS: This study involved conducting focus group interviews and collecting qualitative data from 37 participants in multiple stakeholder groups (patients = 6, caregivers = 5, service providers = 7, government staff = 5 and researchers = 14) in the community mental health field. The data were qualitatively analysed using a data-driven approach that derived domains, themes and subthemes related to perspectives on PPI and to specific challenges and approaches for implementing PPI. RESULTS: The qualitative analysis identified four domains. The 'Positive views and expectations regarding PPI' domain consisted of themes related to supportive views of PPI in a mental health service research setting and improvements in the quality of research and service. The 'General concerns about PPI' domain included themes concerning the need for non-PPI research and tokenism, excessive expectations concerning social changes and use of evidence from PPI research, and heavy burdens resulting from PPI. The 'Specific issues regarding the implementation of PPI' domain consisted of four themes, including academic systems, selection methods (e.g., representativeness and conflict of interest issues), relationship building, and ambiguous PPI criteria. In particular, all stakeholder groups expressed concerns about relational equality during PPI implementation in Japan. The 'Approaches to PPI implementation' domain included themes such as facilitating mutual understanding, creating a tolerant atmosphere, establishing PPI support systems (e.g., training, ethics and human resource matching) and empowering patient organizations. CONCLUSION: The study replicated most of the barriers and approaches to PPI reported by qualitative research in Western counties. However, utilization of evidence produced by PPI research and partnership in the PPI process may be particularly serious issues in Japan. Future PPI studies should carefully address solutions that fit each culture. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: A patient-researcher was involved in all stages of this project, from development of the research topic and the protocol to manuscript preparation.

Outcomes frequently specified in Cochrane reviews of community-based psychosocial interventions for adults with severe mental illness: A systematic search and narrative synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Outcome selection in intervention studies is a critical issue for synthesizing evidence. This study is aimed to investigate outcomes used in Cochrane reviews assessing community-based psychosocial interventions for adults with severe mental illness. METHODS: Cochrane reviews that evaluated a community-based psychosocial intervention for adults with severe mental illness were searched electronically and manually. We extracted all outcomes specified in the Methods section in each Cochrane review. Outcomes that represent the same concept and context were synthesized into an outcome term. Outcome terms were categorized according to the existing taxonomy. RESULTS: We included 33 Cochrane reviews. Of the 216 outcome terms identified, 13 were used in more than half of the reviews: quality of life, mental state, admission to hospital, economic outcome, leaving the study early, social functioning, satisfaction, global state, relapse, adverse events/effects, carer satisfaction, employment, and duration of admission. Most outcome terms were categorized into the life impact core area (55%), followed by the resource use area (21%). CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides a candidate outcome list for developing a core outcome set for severe mental illness and offers a basis for comparison for future outcome investigation on mental health research.

Consensus development of priority outcome domains for community mental health cares by multiple stakeholders: Protocol for an online Delphi study in Japan.

BACKGROUND: Treatment goals for mental illness have expanded from hospital discharge and improved functioning to employment, living alone, and personal realization. These changes in treatment goals have also influenced mental health research. Recent studies have addressed the development of core outcome sets focusing on clinical aspects of mental illness such as depression and anxiety. However, a well-developed framework of essential outcomes for people with mental illness (service users) who live in the community is lacking. In addition, recent worldwide trends suggest more patient and public involvement and the importance of considering multiple stakeholders' views in the area of mental health research. Purpose of this study is to explore consensus on high-priority outcome domains among multiple stakeholders in community mental healthcare fields in Japan. METHODS: A three-step approach to developing an outcome list will be used. First, we developed a long list of outcomes for community mental health through a literature review, focus group interviews with key stakeholders, and online questionnaire surveys of service users and caregivers. Second, the long list was checked and revised in a pilot study. Third, the long list will be shortened to the outcome list through the Delphi methodology with participation from multiple stakeholders. DISCUSSION: Identifying important common outcome domains through collaboration with multiple stakeholders appears to contribute to the development of evidence for community mental health research in Japan. In addition, the study process itself may help promote patient and public involvement in education, practice, and research in the field of community mental health.

Care difficulties and burden during COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns among caregivers of people with schizophrenia: A cross-sectional study.

AIMS: The purpose of this study was to retrospectively investigate care difficulties experienced by caregivers of people with schizophrenia during COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns in Japan (April 7-May 25, 2020) and examine associations between these care difficulties during lockdowns and daily caregiver burden. METHODS: Data were collected from 132 participants of the LINE Schizophrenia Family Association using an online survey. RESULTS: Caregivers were mostly concerned about who would care for people with schizophrenia if caregivers become infected with COVID-19. A significant association was found between higher daily caregiver burden and more difficult care experiences during COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns (B = 0.58, 95% confidence interval, 0.40-0.75, P < .01, adjusted R-squared = .34). CONCLUSIONS: Further studies and supports for caregivers of people with schizophrenia are needed.