Search

ObjectiveThis study aims to assess the effectiveness of community-based models of care (MoCs) supporting the recovery of individuals who experience persistent and complex mental health needs.MethodWe conducted a systematic review and narrative synthesis of MoC studies reporting clinical, functional, or personal recovery from October 2016 to October 2021. Sources were Medline, EMBASE, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases. Studies were grouped according to MoC features. The narrative synthesis was led by our researchers with lived experience.ResultsBeneficial MoCs ranged from well-established to novel and updated models and those explicitly addressing recovery goals and incorporating peer support: goal-focused; integrated community treatment; intensive case management; partners in recovery care coordination; rehabilitation and recovery-focused; social and community connection-focused; supported accommodation; and vocational support. None of our diverse group of MoCs supporting recovery warranted a rating of best practice. Established MoCs, such as intensive case management, are promising practices regarding clinical and functional recovery, with potential for enhancements to support personal recovery. Emerging practice models that support personal and functional recovery are those where consumer goals and priorities are central.ConclusionEvidence for established models of care shows that there is a need for inevitable evolution and adaptation. Considering the high importance of effective MoCs for people experiencing persistent and complex mental health needs, further attention to service innovation and research is required. Greater emphasis on the inclusion of lived and living experience in the design, delivery, implementation, and research of MoCs is needed, to enhance MOCs' relevance for achieving individual consumer recovery outcomes.

ObjectiveThe consequences and impact of violent behavior in schizophrenia are often serious, and identification of risk factors is of great importance to achieve early identification and effective management.MethodsThis follow-up study sampled adult patients with schizophrenia in primary mental health care in a rural area of southern China, in which 491 participants completed a comprehensive questionnaire at baseline and the 2-year follow-up. Sociodemographic, clinical and psychological assessment data were collected from all participants. Paired sample T-Tests and the McNemar Test were performed to examine changes over the follow-up period. Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) were used to analyze the risk factors for violent behavior.ResultsThe results showed that about two in five community-dwelling patients with schizophrenia reported violent behavior in the past year. At follow-up, participants were significantly less employed, had more times of hospitalization, more psychotropic medication, and severer depressive symptoms, but had better health-related quality of life than at baseline. Use of clozapine and better insight into medication decreased the possibility of violent behavior, while more severe positive symptoms, insomnia, as well as use of second-generation antipsychotics other than clozapine, antidepressants and mood stabilizers increased the possibility of violent behavior.ConclusionsRisk evaluation, prevention and management of violence in patients with schizophrenia are demanded in primary mental health care.

Person-centered care is a collaborative approach to health care. To provide effective, person-centered care to people living with severe mental illness, it is necessary to understand how people view their own needs. The Perceived Need for Care Questionnaire (PNCQ) was used in the Australian National Survey of High Impact Psychosis (SHIP) to deepen understanding and evaluate, at a population level, the needs of Australian adults living with psychotic illness. SHIP participants were 1,825 adults, aged 18–65 years, living with psychotic illness and in contact with public specialized mental health services across Australia in 2010. The survey package included demographic and clinical items, and various scales including the PNCQ appraising a comprehensive range of life domains. Logistic regressions measured the impact that various demographic, clinical and psychosocial independent variables (e.g., loneliness, health-related quality of life, disability, accommodation type) had on the likelihood of inadequately met PNCQ domain-related need. Over two-thirds of people living with psychosis reported at least two areas of unmet need for care despite most being in contact with mental health services. Work or using one's time and socializing, counseling, and self-care domains had the largest proportion of inadequately met needs (range between 49 and 57%). Feelings of loneliness and/or social isolation were significantly associated with unmet needs across all PNCQ domains, except for financial needs. Health-related quality of life was significantly associated with unmet needs across all domains, except for housing needs. Disability was significantly associated with unmet social, occupation (work or time use), housing and medication-related needs. Consumers view their needs for care as unmet across many life areas despite being in contact with mental health services. Loneliness, unmet psychosocial needs, and health-related quality of life appear strongly interconnected and warrant greater attention in the delivery of person-centered care for people living with psychosis. Support to address social, work or time use and housing related needs among people living with psychosis appears less well targeted toward those with disability. Results underscore the link between quality of life, recovery and needs. These inter-relationships should be considered in mental health services research and evaluation.

Background: Choice, control, privacy, and security are widely reported housing preferences of mental health consumers, are associated with improved well-being and greater housing satisfaction, and are important for recovery. This paper describes housing and neighborhood experiences from a larger qualitative study that sought to learn with people experiencing mental health issues about their everyday lives in an Australian urban community.Methods: A participatory approach to health research informed this study. A participatory reference group, including four people with consumer perspective knowledge and experience of mental health issues and four mental health practitioners with service provider and researcher perspectives, worked together to design and implement this study over a 4-year period. Thirty-nine participants were recruited, including 18 women and 21 men living in metropolitan Melbourne and receiving community mental health care for ongoing mental health issues related mainly to either psychotic or affective disorders. Participants each took part in one to three interviews or a focus group. The data were transcribed and analyzed using narrative and thematic analytic strategies, underpinned by reflective discussions with the participatory reference group.Findings: Participants’ experiences of their housing and neighborhoods emphasized qualities that either contributed to or challenged their sense of being “at home.” Identifying with a place as home was transformative, especially when supported by friendly neighborhood interactions, safety, and accessibility of local amenities. Unsatisfactory housing situations and limited income worked against participants’ efforts to regain a sense of well-being and improve their situations. When being home was challenging, strategies used to counteract this included getting a pet and getting out as a means of resisting isolation at home. Differing views and ways of using the available support workers were described, suggesting tensions between seeking to be self-sufficient and valuing support.Conclusions: Social housing locations and housing-related support should explicitly attend to safety and security concerns. Collaborative care planning and outreach support should attend to supports for navigating issues with neighbors, housing, harnessing natural supports, and opportunities for being in others’ company, as well as recognizing the importance of pets in people’s lives. Understanding the strategies that mental health consumers find helpful in creating a sense of being at home, and the role of “place” in recovery merit further consideration in research and practice.

Background: Prevention and Recovery Care (PARC) services are relatively new sub-acute residential services that have supported people with mental ill-health in Victoria since 2003. Operated from a partnership model between non-governmental agencies and clinical mental health services, PARC services integrate intensive recovery-focused psychosocial input with clinical mental health care.Aim: To describe and contrast the 19 PARC services operating in Victoria at the time of the study, in terms of structures and function, resources, and content and quality of care.Method: Nineteen participants, one representing each PARC, completed two surveys: the first, a purpose-designed survey relating to the government guidelines for PARC services, and the second, the Quality Indicator for Rehabilitative Care.Results: Descriptive analyses highlighted that PARC services have operated in inner-city, urban, and regional areas of Victoria, from between 1 and 14 years. Participants reported that a recovery approach was at the core of service delivery, with a vast array of group and individual programs on offer. Across the state, there was variation in the quality of services according to the Quality Indicator for Rehabilitative Care domains.Conclusions: This study has identified that there is variation in the structure and function, resourcing, and content and quality of care offered across Victoria’s PARC services even though, in the main, they are guided by government guidelines. Hence it appears that the services adapt to local needs and changes in service systems occurring over time. The findings indicate emerging evidence that PARCs are providing recovery-oriented services, which offer consumers autonomy and social inclusion, and therefore likely enable a positive consumer experience. The range of individual and group programs is in line with the Victorian guidelines, offering practical assistance, therapeutic activities, and socialization opportunities consistent with consumer preferences. Further research into implementation processes and their impacts on quality of care is warranted concerning this and similar service models.

Aims: Community-based residential alternatives to hospitalization are an emerging service model. Evidence for their acceptability and effectiveness is promising but limited. Prevention and Recovery Care (PARC) services are one such residential model, offering short-term subacute treatment and care (usually between 7 and 28 days). PARC services in Victoria, Australia, are designed to support consumers with severe mental illness to either avoid a psychiatric hospital admission (step-up care) or transition from hospital back into the community (step-down care). As a precursor to a series of studies investigating the appropriateness, effectiveness and efficiency of PARC services, we aimed to investigate whether a typology of PARC services can be developed.Methods: A manager or other appropriately knowledgeable staff member from each of the 19 adult PARC services included in the study completed a tool based on PARC operational guidelines (the Victorian PARC service mapping questionnaire) and a validated instrument measuring the quality of care in residential mental health settings (the Quality Indicator for Rehabilitative Care, QuIRC). Thirty (of 42) stakeholders participated in a modified Delphi study to select 23 from the available 230 variables for entry into a hierarchical cluster analysis.Results: Cluster analysis produced three clusters of equal dissimilarity. At the 90% confidence level, there were four variables which were significantly different between clusters. These were the year the PARC was opened, the QuIRC Living Environment domain score, the proportion of all admissions that were a step-down admission from an inpatient unit, and how often families were invited to care meetings. Sensitivity analyses suggested the findings were robust to the method used to identify clusters.Conclusions: Although PARC services were broadly similar, their identified differences suggest there is variable model implementation across Victoria sufficient to generate a PARC service typology. This typology may prove important for interpreting differences in outcomes experienced by consumers and carers using PARC services, when applied in our analyses of service effectiveness. The value of conducting service mapping and typology studies is underscored. Further research to characterize subacute residential services, including recovery-promoting features of the built environment, is warranted.