The Overlooked Part of Flexible Assertive Community Treatment-A Retrospective Study on Factors Related to Discharge from FACT for Clients with a Psychotic Disorder.

Flexible assertive community treatment (FACT) is a recovery-based treatment and its manual describes discharge criteria for clients who are recovered. Yet research on discharge is lacking. In this retrospective and observational study, between 2009 and 2019, we explored how sociodemographic, clinical, and treatment factors are associated with planned discharge or no discharge. We included 1734 clients with a psychotic disorder of which 38.5% were discharged after a mutual decision that FACT was no longer necessary. Logistic regression analysis was used to create a discharge profile which was more favorable for discharged clients. They were older at the start of FACT, had lower HoNOS scores, were diagnosed with another psychotic disorder, and had fewer contacts with non-FACT members. Discharge is a part of FACT and is more common than anticipated. While this study provides preliminary answers, further research is necessary to better understand discharge and its associated factors.

Motivation, treatment engagement and psychosocial outcomes in outpatients with severe mental illness: a test of Self-Determination Theory.

Currently, it is unclear whether Self-Determination Theory (SDT) applies to the mental health care of patients with severe mental illness (SMI). Therefore, the current study tested the process model of SDT in a sample of outpatients with SMI. Participants were 294 adult outpatients with a primary diagnosis of a psychotic disorder or a personality disorder and their clinicians (n = 57). Structural equation modelling was used to test the hypothesized relationships between autonomy support, perceived competence, types of motivation, treatment engagement, psychosocial functioning and quality of life at two time points and across the two diagnostic groups. The expected relations among the SDT variables were found, but additional direct paths between perceived competence and clinical outcomes were needed to obtain good model fit. The obtained process model was found to be stable across time and different diagnostic patient groups, and was able to explain 18% to 36% of variance in treatment engagement, psychosocial functioning and quality of life. It is concluded that SDT can be a useful basis for interventions in the mental health care for outpatients with SMI. Additional experimental research is needed to confirm the causality of the relations between the SDT constructs and their ability to influence treatment outcomes.

Different Perspectives of Clinicians and Patients with Severe Mental Illness on Motivation for Treatment.

The present study assessed motivation for engaging in treatment as rated by clinicians (n = 57) and patients with severe mental illness (SMI, n = 294) using measures based on three different motivation theories. Questionnaires were derived from self-determination theory, the transtheoretical model and the integral model of treatment motivation. It was investigated to which extent clinicians of patients with SMI were able to estimate their patient's perspective on motivation for engaging in treatment, to which extent they agreed on the patient's motivation and which factors were associated with estimation and agreement on treatment motivation. It was found that clinicians were poorly to moderately capable of estimating their patient's type of motivation and readiness for change. Further, agreement on the level of motivation between patients and clinicians was moderate. These findings were consistent across diagnostic groups (psychotic and personality disorders). A higher quality therapeutic relationship was generally associated with higher clinician-rated motivation. The patient's ethnicity and socially desirable responding were factors that differentiated between scales of different motivation theories. It is concluded that patients with SMI and their clinicians have different perceptions on the patient's motivation for engaging in psychiatric treatment, regardless of the theoretical framework that is used to measure motivation. The findings imply that a negotiated approach is needed where both perceptions of clinicians and patients on motivation for treatment are considered to ensure effective mental health interventions. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. KEY PRACTITIONER MESSAGE: Clinicians show poor to moderate capability in estimating how patients perceive their motivation for engaging in treatment, especially so when the patient's motives revolve around feelings of shame and guilt. Clinicians generally give higher motivation ratings for patients where they experience a higher quality therapeutic relationships with, whereas-depending on the scale that is used to measure motivation-they give lower ratings to patients who respond in socially desirable ways and to ethnic minority patients. As patients with SMI and their clinicians have different perceptions on the patient's motivation for engaging in psychiatric treatment (regardless of the theoretical framework that is used to assess motivation), this implies that a negotiated approach is needed where both perceptions of clinicians and patients on motivation for treatment are considered to ensure effective mental health interventions.

The effects of motivation feedback in patients with severe mental illness: a cluster randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of providing clinicians with regular feedback on the patient's motivation for treatment in increasing treatment engagement in patients with severe mental illness. DESIGN: cluster randomized controlled trial (Dutch Trials Registry NTR2968). PARTICIPANTS: adult outpatients with a primary diagnosis of a psychotic disorder or a personality disorder and their clinicians, treated in 12 community mental health teams (the clusters) of two mental health institutions in the Netherlands. INTERVENTIONS: monthly motivation feedback (MF) generated by clinicians additional to treatment as usual (TAU) and TAU by the community mental health teams. PRIMARY OUTCOME: treatment engagement at patient level, assessed at 12 months by clinicians. RANDOMIZATION: teams were allocated to MF or TAU by a computerized randomization program that randomized each team to a single treatment by blocks of varying size. All participants within these teams received similar treatment. Clinicians and patients were not blind to treatment allocation at the 12-month assessment. RESULTS: The 294 randomized patients (148 MF, 146 TAU) and 57 clinicians (29 MF, 28 TAU) of 12 teams (6 MF, 6 TAU) were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle. No statistically significant differences between treatment groups on treatment engagement were found (adjusted mean difference =0.1, 95% confidence interval =-2.2 to 2.3, P=0.96, d=0). Preplanned ancillary analyses showed statistically significant interaction effects between treatment group and primary diagnosis on treatment motivation and quality of life (secondary outcomes), which were beneficial for patients with a primary diagnosis of a personality disorder but not for those with a psychotic disorder. There were no reports of adverse events. CONCLUSION: The current findings imply that monitoring and discussing the patient's motivation is insufficient to improve motivation and treatment engagement, and suggests that more elaborate interventions for severe mental illness patients are needed.

Measures of motivation for psychiatric treatment based on self-determination theory: psychometric properties in Dutch psychiatric outpatients.

Self-determination theory is potentially useful for understanding reasons why individuals with mental illness do or do not engage in psychiatric treatment. The current study examined the psychometric properties of three questionnaires based on self-determination theory-The Treatment Entry Questionnaire (TEQ), Health Care Climate Questionnaire (HCCQ), and the Short Motivation Feedback List (SMFL)-in a sample of 348 Dutch adult outpatients with primary diagnoses of mood, anxiety, psychotic, and personality disorders. Structural equation modeling showed that the empirical factor structures of the TEQ and SMFL were adequately represented by a model with three intercorrelated factors. These were interpreted as identified, introjected, and external motivation. The reliabilities of the Dutch TEQ, HCCQ, and SMFL were found to be acceptable but can be improved on; congeneric estimates ranged from 0.66 to 0.94 depending on the measure and patient subsample. Preliminary support for the construct validities of the questionnaires was found in the form of theoretically expected associations with other scales, including therapist-rated motivation and treatment engagement and with legally mandated treatment. Additionally, the study provides insights into the relations between measures of motivation based on self-determination theory, the transtheoretical model and the integral model of treatment motivation in psychiatric outpatients with severe mental illness.

Motivation and treatment engagement intervention trial (MotivaTe-IT): the effects of motivation feedback to clinicians on treatment engagement in patients with severe mental illness.

BACKGROUND: Treatment disengagement and non-completion poses a major problem for the successful treatment of patients with severe mental illness. Motivation for treatment has long been proposed as a major determinant of treatment engagement, but exact mechanisms remain unclear. This current study serves three purposes: 1) to determine whether a feedback intervention based on the patients' motivation for treatment is effective at improving treatment engagement (TE) of severe mentally ill patients in outpatient psychiatric treatment, 2) to gather insight into motivational processes and possible mechanisms regarding treatment motivation (TM) and TE in this patient population and 3) to determine which of three theories of motivation is most plausible for the dynamics of TM and TE in this population. METHODS/DESIGN: The Motivation and Treatment Engagement Intervention Trial (MotivaTe-IT) is a multi-center cluster randomized trial investigating the effectiveness of feedback generated by clinicians regarding their patients' treatment motivation upon the patients' TE. The primary outcome is the patients' TE. Secondary outcomes are TM, psychosocial functioning and quality of life. Patients whose clinicians generate monthly motivation feedback (additional to treatment as usual) will be compared to patients who receive treatment as usual. An estimated 350 patients, aged 18 to 65 years, with psychotic disorders and/or severe personality disorders will be recruited from outpatient community mental health care. The randomization will be performed by a computerized randomization program, with an allocation ratio of 1:1 (team vs. team or clinician vs. clinician) and patients, but not clinicians, will be blind to treatment allocation at baseline assessment. Due to the nature of the trial, follow-up assessment can not be blinded. DISCUSSION: The current study can provide important insights regarding motivational processes and the way in which motivation influences the treatment engagement and clinical outcomes. The identification of possible mechanisms through which changes in the outcomes occur, offers a tool for the development of more effective future interventions to improve TM and TE. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials NTR2968.