Is Home Treatment for Everyone? Characteristics of Patients Receiving Intensive Mental Health Care at Home.

We aimed at determining differential characteristics of patients treated by a home treatment (HT) team compared to patients treated on hospital wards. Of 412 consecutively admitted patients, 194 (47.1%) were at least partially treated at home, whereas 218 (52.9%) received inpatient treatment only during an episode of acute illness. A multivariate logistic regression model identified current employment to increase the odds of HT (p < 0.001). A primary diagnosis of anxiety or stress-related disorder (p < 0.001), other rare primary diagnoses such as personality disorders (p < 0.001), and more pronounced clinician-rated social problems (p = 0.041) decreased the odds of HT. Overall, it remained difficult to clearly specify suitability for HT based on available sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. This might indicate that responsible clinicians consider HT to be a viable alternative to hospital care and hence initiate HT for a relatively broad spectrum of patients.

Home Treatment for Acute Mental Healthcare: Who Benefits Most?

Home treatment (HT) has been proposed as an alternative to inpatient treatment for individuals in acute mental crises. However, there is limited evidence concerning the effectiveness of HT to date. The aim of this study was to investigate which patients benefit most from HT. The concept and utilization of two HT services in Switzerland were retrospectively compared based on routine medical data of all patients who were treated in one of the two HT services between July 2016 and December 2017. We examined which patient characteristics were related to successful replacement of hospital care by HT based on a calculated success score using binary regression analyses. The whole sample included 408 individuals with an average age of 43 years and of whom 68% were female. As a result of conceptual similarities, in both HT settings, the typical patient was middle-aged, female and having an affective disorder as the main diagnosis. Half of the treatment cases met the criteria of successful replacement of hospital care (> 50% of the total treatment episodes in HT, treatment duration < 40 days and treatment terminated by mutual agreement). The results of the regression analyses indicated that patients with a lower symptom severity at admission (lower HoNOS score) and those who were employed had more likely a successful replacement of hospital care.The findings suggest that patients with acute mental disorders who have a certain level of functioning and social support might benefit most from HT in the sense of successful replacement of hospital care.

Home treatment for acute mental healthcare: randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Home treatment has been proposed as an alternative to acute in-patient care for mentally ill patients. However, there is only moderate evidence in support of home treatment. AIMS: To test whether and to what degree home treatment services would enable a reduction (substitution) of hospital use. METHOD: A total of 707 consecutively admitted adult patients with a broad spectrum of mental disorders (ICD-10: F2-F6, F8-F9, Z) experiencing crises that necessitated immediate admission to hospital, were randomly allocated to either a service model including a home treatment alternative to hospital care (experimental group) or a conventional service model that lacked a home treatment alternative to in-patient care (control group) (trial registration at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02322437). RESULTS: The mean number of hospital days per patient within 24 months after the index crisis necessitating hospital admission (primary outcome) was reduced by 30.4% (mean 41.3 v. 59.3, P<0.001) when a home treatment team was available (intention-to-treat analysis). Regarding secondary outcomes, average overall treatment duration (hospital days + home treatment days) per patient (mean 50.4 v. 59.3, P = 0.969) and mean number of hospital admissions per patient (mean 1.86 v. 1.93, P = 0.885) did not differ statistically significantly between the experimental and control groups within 24 months after the index crisis. There were no significant between-group differences regarding clinical and social outcomes (Health of the Nation Outcome Scales: mean 9.9 v. 9.7, P = 0.652) or patient satisfaction with care (Perception of Care questionnaire: mean 0.78 v. 0.80, P = 0.242). CONCLUSIONS: Home treatment services can reduce hospital use among severely ill patients in acute crises and seem to result in comparable clinical/social outcomes and patient satisfaction as standard in-patient care.

Long-Term Effects of the Individual Placement and Support Intervention on Employment Status: 6-Year Follow-Up of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

People with mental illness often experience difficulties with reintegration into the workplace, although employment is known to assist these individuals in their recovery process. Traditional approaches of "first train, then place" have been recently replaced by supported employment (SE) methods that carry strategy of "first place, then train." Individual placement and support (IPS) is one of the best-studied methods of SE, which core principles are individualized assistance in rapid job search with consequent placement in a paid employment position. A considerable amount of high-quality evidence supported the superiority of IPS over conventional methods in providing improved employment rates, longer job tenure, as well as higher salaries in competitive job markets. Nonetheless, our knowledge about the IPS-mediated long-term effects is limited. This non-interventional follow-up study of a previously published randomized controlled trial (RCT) called ZhEPP aimed to understand the long-term impact of IPS after 6 years since the initial intervention. Participants from the ZhEPP trial, where 250 disability pensioners with mental illnesses were randomized into either IPS intervention group or treatment as usual group (TAU), were invited to face-to-face interviews, during which employment status, job tenure, workload, and salaries were assessed. One hundred and fourteen individuals agreed to participate in this follow-up study. Although during the first 2 years post-intervention, the IPS group had higher employment rates (40% (IPS) vs. 28% (TAU), p < 0.05 at 24 months), these differences disappeared by the time of follow-up assessments (72 months). The results indicated no substantial differences in primary outcome measures between IPS and TAU groups: employment rate (36 vs. 33%), workload (10.57 vs. 10.07 h per week), job tenure (29 vs. 28 months), and salary (20.21CHF vs. 25.02 CHF). These findings provide important insights regarding the long-term effects of IPS among individuals with mental health illnesses. Further research is required to advance the current knowledge about IPS intervention and its years-long impact.

Coercion in substance use disorders: clinical course of compulsory admissions in a Swiss psychiatric hospital.

According to the Swiss legal system, involuntary admission is one of the farthest-reaching incursions into personal autonomy. The effect of compulsory admission in treatment of substance use disorders (SUDs) on variables such as length of stay or leaving treatment before recommended discharge remains elusive. In order to elucidate these effects, we retrospectively analysed the clinical course of treatment of 608 patients who were admitted between November 2016 and October 2017 to the Department of Addictive Disorders of the canton of Aargau. Involuntarily admitted patients showed lower health and social functioning, as measured by the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS), compared with those with voluntary status. In involuntary admissions for SUD treatment, length of stay was significantly shorter and the proportion of patients who left treatment against recommendation was twice as high as in voluntarily admitted patients. Furthermore, if treatment was initiated on a compulsory basis, a subsequent switch to voluntary treatment status appeared to be very uncommon. We conclude that, at least in involuntary admission according to the Swiss legal system, these admissions do not lead to sustained inpatient treatment.

[How does Home Treatment Work out in Practice? A Qualitative Study Among Patients, Relatives, and Staff]. / Wie gelingt Home Treatment in der Praxis? Eine qualitative Studie unter Einbezug von Patienten, Angehörigen und Mitarbeitenden.

OBJECTIVE: To identify effective components of home treatment (HT) and to evaluate the implementation of a new HT team from a service user perspective. METHODS: Experiences of patients, relatives and staff were assessed using semi-structured interviews and an online questionnaire. Thematic analysis was applied to determine key themes. RESULTS: 25 interviews and 70 questionnaires were analysed. Four key themes emerged: individualisation, proximity to daily life, conceptual aspects, and requirements (for patients and for the service model). Major challenges for the implementation of HT were the suitability for HT, time of referral to HT, and handing over of responsibility from hospital staff to the HT team. CONCLUSION: Essential requirements for HT are no-harm agreements, patients' ability to maintain daily routines, and shared responsibility between patients and staff. Implementing HT within an existing care system should be accompanied by sufficient information on the new service model for other service providers involved. This may be achieved through HT team members visiting hospital wards and outpatient facilities, illustrating functioning and limitations of HT using case reports.

Validity of routine clinical diagnoses in acute psychiatric inpatients.

AIM: To examine the validity of diagnoses obtained by clinicians during routine clinical examination on acute psychiatric inpatient wards. METHODS: N=100 inpatients with a broad spectrum of major mental disorders were randomly selected in a mental hospital's department of general psychiatry. Patients were diagnosed by independent assessors within Md = 5 (Range: 1-18) days of admission using the SCID I in order to examine the validity of the diagnoses given by the clinical staff based on routine assessments. RESULTS: The commonly used clinical examination technique had good overall agreement with the SCID I assessments regarding primary diagnoses at the level of ICD-10 main categories (F2, F30-31, F32-F33, F4; κ = 0.65). However, agreement between routine clinical diagnoses and the SCID I diagnoses tended to be low for some specific mental disorders (e.g., depressive disorders) and for secondary diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: The validity of routine clinical diagnoses established in acute inpatient settings is limited and should be improved.