Predicting outcome of assertive outreach across England
- 367 Downloads
Assertive community treatment for the severely mentally ill is being implemented increasingly internationally. It is unclear whether recommended characteristics of assertive outreach (AO) teams influence care and outcomes. We hypothesised that recommended characteristics of AO teams such as joint health and social care management would predict reduced hospitalisation in the first year of an AO client programme and related outcomes throughout England.
A two-stage design was used: a stratified sample of 100 of the 186 ‘stand-alone’ AO teams in England and a systematic sample of clients from each team with stratification for black and ethnic minority patients. Team characteristics, treatment and outcomes were collected from teams. Analyses took account of patients’ histories, clustering and ethnic minority over-sampling.
Under AO the proportion of time spent in hospital following admission decreased. Only 3/1,096 patients went missing in 9 months. Although patient’ histories significantly predicted outcomes almost no team characteristics predicted re-admission or other patient outcomes after 1 and 3 years. Ethnic minority clients were more likely to be on compulsory orders only on jointly managed teams (P = 0.030). Multidisciplinary teams and teams not working out of hours significantly predicted that patients received psychological interventions, but only 17% of sampled patients received such treatments.
Characteristics of AO teams do not explain long-term patient outcomes. Since recommended team characteristics are not effective new models of care should be developed and the process of care tested. Managing teams to implement evidence-based psychological interventions might improve outcomes.
KeywordsCommunity Treatment Process of care Multidisciplinary
Policy Research Programme, Department of Health, England. T. Brugha is the principal grant holder.
Conflict of interest
- 1.Brugha T, Glover G (1998) Process and health outcomes: need for clarity in systematic reviews of case management for severe mental disorders. Health Trends 30(3):76–79Google Scholar
- 8.de Jong A (1996) ICMC International Classification of Mental Health Care, vol 43. WHO Collaborating Centre, Department of Social Psychiatry, University of Groningen, Groningen, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
- 9.Department of Health (1999) National Service Frameworks for Mental Health. Modern standards and service models. Department of Health, LondonGoogle Scholar
- 10.Department of Health (2001) The Mental Health Policy Implementation Guide. Department of Health, LondonGoogle Scholar
- 11.Donabedian A (1966) Evaluating the quality of medical care. Milbank Meml Fund Q 44(3 Suppl):106–206Google Scholar
- 12.Everitt B (1995) The Cambridge dictionary of statistics in the medical sciences. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- 17.Moser CA, Kalton G (1979) Survey methods in social investigation, 2nd edn. Gower, AldershotGoogle Scholar
- 19.Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health (1998) Keys to engagement. Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health, UKGoogle Scholar
- 20.STATA Corp (2007) Stata statistical software, release 9.2. STATA Corp, College StationGoogle Scholar
- 27.Wright C, Hovell L, White S, Burns T, Brugha TS, Carpenter J, Evans J (2011) Assertive outreach in England: a national study of service organisation and conformity to model fidelity. Br J Psychiatry (in press)Google Scholar