Search

Abstract Background Over the last decades, many high-income countries have successfully implemented assertive outreach mental health services for acute care. Despite evidence that these services entail several benefits for service users, Germany has lagged behind and has been slow in implementing outreach services. In 2018, a new law enabled national mental health care providers to implement team-based crisis intervention services on a regular basis, allowing for different forms of Inpatient Equivalent Home Treatment (IEHT). IEHT is similar to the internationally known Home Treatment or Crisis Resolution Teams. It provides acute psychiatric treatment at the user’s home, similar to inpatient hospital treatment in terms of content, flexibility, and complexity. Methods/design The presented naturalistic, quasi-experimental cohort study will evaluate IEHT in ten hospitals running IEHT services in different German regions. Within a multi-method research approach, it will evaluate stakeholders’ experiences of care, service use, efficacy, costs, treatment processes and implementation processes of IEHT from different perspectives. Quantitative surveys will be used to recruit 360 service users. Subsequently, 180 service users receiving IEHT will be compared with 180 matched statistical ‘twins’ receiving standard inpatient treatment. Assessments will take place at baseline as well as after 6 and 12 months. The primary outcome is the hospital re-admission rate within 12 months. Secondary outcomes include the combined readmission rate, total number of inpatient hospital days, treatment discontinuation rate, quality of life, psycho-social functioning, job integration, recovery, satisfaction with care, shared decision-making, and treatment costs. Additionally, the study will assess the burden of care and satisfaction with care among relatives or informal caregivers. A collaborative research team made up of researchers with and without lived experience of mental distress will conduct qualitative investigations with service users, caregivers and IEHT staff teams to explore critical ingredients and interactions between implementation processes, treatment processes, and outcomes from a stakeholder perspective. Discussion By integrating outcome, process and implementation research as well as different stakeholder perspectives and experiences in one study, this trial captures the various facets of IEHT as a special form of home treatment. Therefore, it allows for an adequate, comprehensive evaluation on different levels of this complex intervention. Trial registration Trial registrations: 1) German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS), DRKS000224769. Registered December 3rd 2020, https://www.drks.de/drks_web/setLocale_EN.do ; 2) ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT0474550 . Registered February 9th 2021.

Objective: The literature pertaining to patients' perceptions of commitment and its consequences is limited. The object of this study was to learn more about these experiences from the patient's perspective.Material and Methods: 108 court-committed patients (78% of whom were schizophrenic) were identified for inclusion in a retrospective follow-up study. After an interval varying from one to 4.5 years from time of commitment to follow-up, 76 patients could be contacted, of whom 47 were included in the follow-up.Results: The majority of patients felt that their court commitment had not been justified and could have been avoided. Events and circumstances identified as particularly stressful about commitment were confinement in a locked ward, side effects of medication, feelings of helplessness, and certain staffbehaviors. Adverse psychological, somatic, and social consequences were common. Coercive measures during hospitalization were strongly associated with negative feelings about the effect of commitment on mental health and about subsequent treatment. The majority, however, also remained in treatment after commitment was terminated, said they would return to hospital in event of future crisis, and had pertinent comments about how commitment could have been avoided.Conclusions: Many patients who had been court-committed reported negative feelings about their experiences, but the great majority had continued in treatment, both at the termination of commitment and later. They also had ideas about how to reduce the negative impact of commitment that are worth including in future contingency plans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Der Nervenarzt is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Introduction: Psychotropic drug combinations (PDC) are common in the treatment of patients with schizophrenia but there is little research regarding the effects of PDC on cognition. Objective: The aim of this study was to analyse the effects of antipsychotic monotherapy and various types of PDC on cognitive processing speed (CPS). Methods: ELAN is a 24-month multi-site prospective observational controlled trial following up 374 patients with schizophrenia under routine treatment conditions following discharge from inpatient treatment. The propensity score method, multinomial logistic regression analyses and mixed effects regression models were used. Results: CPS correlated significantly with PANSS and GAF scores and improved over time in the monotherapy group. Negative effects of some PDC (antipsychotics + tranquilizers/antipsychotics + at least 2 other psychopharmacological subclasses, sedative/anticholinergic drugs/high adjusted antipsychotic dose) lost significance after controlling for clinical characteristics. Discussion: Indications for PDC should be examined with care although, in the present study, effects on cognition were small. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]