Non-uniform effectiveness of structured patient–clinician communication in community mental healthcare: an international comparison
- 308 Downloads
The effectiveness of psychosocial interventions in community mental healthcare has been shown to depend on the setting in which they are implemented. Recently structured patient–clinician communication was found to be effective in a multi-centre trial in six European countries, the DIALOG trial. In the overall study, differences between centres were controlled for, not studied. Here, we test whether the effectiveness of structured patient–clinician communication varies between services in different countries, and explore setting characteristics associated with outcome.
The study is part of the DIALOG trial, which included 507 patients with schizophrenia or related disorder, treated by 134 keyworkers. The keyworkers were allocated to intervention or treatment as usual.
Positive effects were found on quality of life (effect size 0.20: 95% CI 0.01–0.39) and treatment satisfaction (0.27: 0.06–0.47) in all centres, but reductions in unmet needs for care were only seen in two centres (−0.83 and −0.60), and in positive, negative and general symptoms in one (−0.87, −0.78, −0.87). The intervention was most effective in settings with patient populations with many unmet needs for care and high symptom levels.
Psychosocial interventions in community mental healthcare may not be assumed to have uniform effectiveness across settings. Differences in patient population served and mental healthcare provided, should be studied for their influence on the effectiveness of the intervention. Structured patient–clinician communication has a uniform effect on quality of life and treatment satisfaction, but on unmet needs for care and symptom levels its effect differs between mental healthcare settings.
KeywordsPhysician–patient relations Computer-assisted decision making Community mental health services Population characteristics Health services research
The DIALOG group includes: Marta Ribes Leyva, Maria F. Soriano Peña, Beatriz Arroyo de Domingo (Granada); Aukelien Mulder, Jappie Tiersma (Groningen); Rakhee Haque, Donna Wright (London); Tommy Björkman (Lund); Marita Reichenbacher, Anette Axt (Mannheim); Patric Meyer, Minka Burgi (Zürich). We thank the clinicians and patients who took part in the DIALOG trial. The trial was funded by the Research Directorate of the European Commission within the Framework Programme 5 (QLG5-CT-2002-01938).
- 7.Priebe S, McCabe R, Bullenkamp J, Hansson L, Lauber C, Martinez-Leal R, Rössler W, Salize H, Svensson B, Torres-Gonzales F, van den Brink R, Wiersma D, Wright DJ (2007) Structured patient-clinician communication and 1-year outcome in community mental healthcare. Cluster randomised controlled trial. Br J Psychiatry 191:420–426PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Fisher H, Theodore K, Power P, Chisholm B, Fuller J, Marlowe K, Aitchison KJ, Tanna R, Joyce J, Sacks M, Craig T, Johnson S (2008) Routine evaluation in first episode psychosis services: feasibility and results from the MiData project. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 43:960–967PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Wiersma D, van den Brink R, Wolters K, McCabe R, Bullenkamp J, Hansson L, Lauber C, Martinez-Leal R, Rössler W, Salize H, Björkman T, Torres-Gonzales F, Wright D, Priebe J (2009) Individual unmet needs for care: are they sensitive as outcome criterion for the effectiveness of mental health services interventions? Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 44:317–324PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Hansson L, Svensson B, Björkman T, Bullenkamp J, Lauber C, Martinez-Leal R, McCabe R, Rössler W, Salize H, Torres-Gonzales F, van den Brink R, Wiersma D, Priebe S (2008) What works for whom in a computer mediated communication intervention in community psychiatry? Moderators of outcome in a cluster randomized trial. Acta Psychiatr Scand 118:404–409PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar