Recovery and decision-making involvement in people with severe mental illness from six countries: a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical decision-making is the vehicle of health care provision, and level of involvement predicts implementation and satisfaction. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of decision-making experience on recovery. METHODS: Data derived from an observational cohort study "Clinical decision making and outcome in routine care for people with severe mental illness" (CEDAR). Adults (aged 18-60) meeting standardised criteria for severe mental illness were recruited from caseloads of outpatient and community mental health services in six European countries. After consenting, they were assessed using standardised measures of decision-making, clinical outcome and stage of recovery at baseline and 1 year later. Latent class analysis was used to identify course of recovery, and proportional odds models to investigate predictors of recovery stage and change. RESULTS: Participants (n = 581) clustered into three stages of recovery at baseline: Moratorium (N = 115; 19.8%), Awareness/Preparation (N = 145; 25.0%) and Rebuilding/Growth (N = 321; 55.2%). Higher stage was cross-sectionally associated with being male, married, living alone or with parents, and having better patient-rated therapeutic alliance and fewer symptoms. The model accounted for 40% of the variance in stage of recovery. An increased chance of worse outcome (change over 1 year to lower stage of recovery) was found for patients with active involvement compared with either shared (OR = 1.84, 95% CI 1.15-2.94) or passive (OR = 1.71, 95% CI = 1.00-2.95) involvement. Overall, both process (therapeutic relationship) and outcome (symptomatology) are cross-sectionally associated with stage of recovery. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-rated decision-making involvement and change in stage of recovery are associated. Joint consideration of decision practise within the recovery process between patient and clinician is supposed to be a useful strategy to improve clinical practice (ISRCTN registry: ISRCTN75841675. Retrospectively registered 15 September 2010).

Helping Alliance and Unmet Needs in Routine Care of People With Severe Mental Illness Across Europe: A Prospective Longitudinal Multicenter Study.

The helping alliance (HA) refers to the collaborative bond between patient and therapist, including shared goals and tasks. People with severe mental illness have a complex mixture of clinical and social needs. Using mixed-effects regression, this study examined in 588 people with severe mental illness whether an increase in the HA is associated with fewer unmet needs over time, and whether change in the HA precedes change in unmet needs. It was found that a reduction in unmet needs was slower in patients with higher HA (B = 0.04, p < 0.0001) only for patient-rated measures. Improvement in both patient-rated and staff-rated HA over time was associated with fewer subsequent patient-rated (B = -0.10, p < 0.0001) and staff-rated (B = -0.08, p = 0.0175) unmet needs. With positive changes in the HA preceding fewer unmet needs, findings provide further evidence for a causal relationship between alliance and outcome in the treatment of people with severe mental illness.

Courses of helping alliance in the treatment of people with severe mental illness in Europe: a latent class analytic approach.

PURPOSE: The helping alliance (HA) between patient and therapist has been studied in detail in psychotherapy research, but less is known about the HA in long-term community mental health care. The aim of this study was to identify typical courses of the HA and their predictors in a sample of people with severe mental illness across Europe over a measurement period of one year. METHODS: Self-ratings of the HA by 588 people with severe mental illness who participated in a multicentre European study (CEDAR; ISRCTN75841675) were examined using latent class analysis. RESULTS: Four main patterns of alliance were identified: (1) high and stable (HS, 45.6 %), (2) high and increasing (HI, 36.9 %), (3) high and decreasing (HD, 11.3 %) and (4) low and increasing (LI, 6.1 %). Predictors of class membership were duration of illness, ethnicity, and education, receipt of state benefits, recovery, and quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Results support findings from psychotherapy research about a predominantly stable course of the helping alliance in patients with severe mental illness over time. Implications for research and practice indicate to turn the attention to subgroups with noticeable courses.

Clinical Decision Making and Mental Health Service Use Among Persons With Severe Mental Illness Across Europe.

OBJECTIVE: The study explored relationships between preferences for and experiences of clinical decision making (CDM) with service use among persons with severe mental illness. METHODS: Data from a prospective observational study in six European countries were examined. Associations of baseline staff-rated (N=213) and patient-rated (N=588) preferred and experienced decision making with service use were examined at baseline by using binomial regressions and at 12-month follow-up by using multilevel models. RESULTS: A preference by patients and staff for active patient involvement in decision making, rather than shared or passive decision making, was associated with longer hospital admissions and higher costs at baseline and with increases in admissions over 12 months (p=.043). Low patient-rated satisfaction with an experienced clinical decision was also related to increased costs over the study period (p=.005). CONCLUSIONS: A preference for shared decision making may reduce health care costs by reducing inpatient admissions. Patient satisfaction with decisions was a predictor of costs, and clinicians should maximize patient satisfaction with CDM.

Effects of Clinical Decision Topic on Patients' Involvement in and Satisfaction With Decisions and Their Subsequent Implementation.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical decision making is an important aspect of mental health care. Predictors of how patients experience decision making and whether decisions are implemented are underresearched. This study investigated the relationship between decision topic and involvement in the decision, satisfaction with it, and its subsequent implementation from both staff and patient perspectives. METHODS: As part of the Clinical Decision Making and Outcome in Routine Care for People With Severe Mental Illness study, patients (N=588) and their providers (N=213) were recruited from community-based mental health services in six European countries. Both completed bimonthly assessments for one year using the Clinical Decision Making in Routine Care Scale to assess the decision topic and implementation; both also completed the Clinical Decision Making Involvement and Satisfaction Scale. RESULTS: Three categories of decision topics were determined: treatment (most frequently cited), social, and financial. The topic identified as most important remained stable over the follow-up. Patients were more likely to rate their involvement as active rather than passive for social decisions (odds ratio [OR]=5.7, p<.001) and financial decisions (OR=9.5, p<.001). They were more likely to report higher levels of satisfaction rather than lower levels for social decisions (OR=1.5, p=.01) and financial decisions (OR=1.7, p=.01). Social decisions were more likely to be partly implemented (OR=3.0, p<.001) or fully implemented (OR=1.7, p=.03) than not implemented. CONCLUSIONS: Patients reported poorer involvement, satisfaction, and implementation in regard to treatment-related decisions, compared with social and financial decisions. Clinicians may need to employ different interactional styles for different types of decisions to maximize satisfaction and decision implementation.

[Shared decision-making in the treatment of people with severe mental illness: a focus group study]. / Gemeinsame Entscheidungsfindung in der Behandlung von Patienten mit schweren psychischen Erkrankungen: Eine Fokusgruppenuntersuchung.

OBJECTIVE: Shared decision-making during the course of treatment is important for people with severe mental illness. However, there is still insufficient knowledge about how people with mental illness view decisions, what kind of decisions are made and how patients experience and perceive the process of participation in routine care. METHODS: A qualitative study with focus groups was conducted with patients with chronic mental illness currently receiving outpatient care (N=23). Interviews were audio-taped, transcribed, coded and content analysed. RESULTS: Three main themes were extracted from the data: 1. perception of the clinician and participation, 2. process of communication and flow of information, 3. decisions and transfer. CONCLUSIONS: The perception of participation in the decision process depends on a good patient-doctor relationship. Decisions made in the course of an outpatient long-term treatment are complex and are often not made during one single appointment. Frequently, patients seek the advice of people from their social network and/or other health professionals.