Skip to main content

The process of care in residential facilities

A national survey in Italy

Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology volume 40, pages 540–550 (2005)Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Although residential facilities (RFs) have largely replaced mental hospitals (MHs) in most developed countries for the long-term residential care of severely impaired patients, the process of care in RFs has not been well studied. The aim of this paper is to investigate the process of care in 265 RFs, representing 19.3% of all RFs in Italy, and to devise a classification of RFs based on process characteristics.

Methods

Structured interviews were conducted with the manager and staff of each RF. Residents were evaluated using standardized rating instruments.

Results

Most RFs had specific admission criteria, with one third having a waiting list that averaged about 3 months. There was no formal limitation to the length of stay in three quarters of RFs, and turnover rates were very low. Although a homelike atmosphere was found in many RFs, most facilities had restrictive rules on patients’ daily lives and behaviours. RFs carried out several external activities targeted at integrating patients within the local community. Standardized assessment instruments and written treatment plans were rarely used. A cluster analysis based on the levels of restrictiveness and the standardization of the process of care classified RFs into five groups that differed with respect to daily staff coverage, size, geographical distribution and proportion of former MH residents. No significant intercluster differences were associated with the current clinical and psychosocial characteristics of residents, or with several other outcome variables.

Conclusions

This study provides naturalistic evidence of the heterogeneity of the process of residential care on a large scale. Future efforts should focus on developing an empirical classification of RFs, as well as on national and international standards of care and staffing to address patients’ needs.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

  1. Aubry TD et al (1995) Public attitudes and intentions regarding tenants of community mental health residences who are neighbours. Community Ment Health J 31:39–52

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Brunt D, Hansson L (2002) A comparison of the psychosocial environment of two types of residences for persons with severe mental illness: small congregate community residences and psychiatric inpatient settings. Int J Soc Psychiatry 48:243–252

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Carling PJ (1993) Housing and supports for persons with mental illness: emerging approaches to research and practice. Hosp/Community Psychiatry 44:439–449

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cook JR (1998) Interactions between group homes and neighbours: neighbour preferences. J Behav Health Serv Res 25:425–436

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Cournos F (1987) The impact of environmental factors on outcome in residential programmes. Hosp/Community Psychiatry 38:848–852

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cullen D et al (1997) Community and hospital residential care: a comparative evaluation. Br J Psychol Med 14:92–98

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cutler DL (1986) Community residential options for the chronically mentally ill. Community Ment Health J 22:61–73

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dash P et al (2003) Increasing the impact of health services research. BMJ 327:1351–1359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. de Girolamo G, Cozza M (2000) The Italian psychiatric reform: a 20-year perspective. Int J Law Psychiatry 23:197–214

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. de Girolamo G et al (2002) Residential care in Italy: a national survey of non-hospital facilities. Br J Psychiatry 181:220–225

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. de Girolamo G et al (2005) The severely mentally ill in residential facilities: a national survey in Italy. Psychol Med 35:421–431

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Drachman D (1981) A residential continuum for the chronically mentally ill: a Markov probability model. Eval Health Prof 4:93–104

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Friedrich RM et al (1999) Family and client perspectives on alternative residential settings for persons with severe mental illness. Psychiatr Serv 50:509–514

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Geller JL, Fisher WH (1993) The linear continuum of transitional residences: debunking the myth. Am J Psychiatry 150:1070–1076

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Goering P et al (1992) Social networks of resident in supportive housing. Community Ment Health J 28:199–214

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Grigoletti L et al (2004) I costi delle strutture residenziali psichiatriche italiane. Epidemiol Psichiatr Soc 4:262–269

    Google Scholar 

  17. Gudeman JE, Shore MF (1984) Beyond deinstitutionalization. A new class of facilities for the mentally ill. N Engl J Med 311:832–836

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hull JT, Thompson JC (1981) Predicting adaptive functioning among mentally ill persons in community settings. Am J Community Psychol 9:247–268

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Humberstone V (2002) The experiences of people with schizophrenia living in supported accommodation: a qualitative study using grounded theory methodology. Aust N Z J Psychiatry 36:367–372

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Jones J (2000) Mental health care reforms in Britain and Italy since 1950: a cross-national comparative study. Health Place 6:171–187

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Lucca AM, Allen GJ (2001) A statewide assessment of rehabilitation programmes: general characteristics and services. Psychiatr Rehabil J 24:205–213

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Macry P (1997) Rethinking a stereotype: territorial differences and family models in the modernization of Italy. J Mod Ital Stud 2:188–214

    Google Scholar 

  23. Marino S et al (1996) The provision of psychiatric care in Southern Italy. Results from the ‘Psychiatric in Southern Italy’s Services’ (DE PISIS) survey. Int J Soc Psychiatry 42:181–192

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. McCarthy J, Nelson G (1991) An evaluation of supportive housing for current and former psychiatric patients. Hosp Community Psychiatry 42:1254–1256

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Mollica RF (1983) From asylum to community. The threatened disintegration of public psychiatry. N Engl J Med 308:367–373

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Moos RH et al (2000) Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) ratings: determinants and roles as predictors of one-year treatment outcomes. J Clin Psychol 56:449–461

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Moos RH et al (2002) Global Assessment of Functioning ratings and the allocation and outcomes of mental health services. Psychiatr Serv 53:730–737

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Nagy MP et al (1988) Effects of facility characteristics on the social adjustment of mentally ill residents of board-and-care homes. Hosp Community Psychiatry 39:1281–1286

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Nelson G et al (1992) Social network transactions of psychiatric patients. Soc Sci Med 34:433–445

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. O’Driscoll C, Leff J (1993) The TAPS project. 8: Design of the research study on the long-stay patients. Br J Psychiatry 162(suppl 19):18–24

    Google Scholar 

  31. Owen C et al (1996) Housing accommodation preferences of people with psychiatric disabilities. Psychiatr Serv 47:628–632

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Progetto obiettivo ‘Tutela della salute mentale (1998–2000)’. Gazzetta Ufficiale della Repubblica Italiana 274:4–13 (24 November 1999)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Segal SP, Kotler PL (1993) Sheltered care residence: ten-year personal outcomes. Am J Orthopsychiatry 63:80–91

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Shepherd G et al (1996) Residential care in hospital and in the community—quality of care and quality of life. Br J Psychiatry 168:448–456

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Solomon J, Fioritti A (2002) Motivational intervention as applied to systems change: the case of dual diagnosis. Subst Use Misuse 37:1833–1851

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Tanzman B (1993) An overview of surveys of mental health consumers’ preferences for housing and support services. Hosp Community Psychiatry 44:450–455

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Thornicroft G, Bebbington P (1989) Deinstitutionalisation—from hospital closure to services development. Br J Psychiatry 155:739–753

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Timko C et al (2003) Trends in acute mental health care: comparing psychiatric and substance abuse treatment programmes. J Behav Health Serv Res 30:145–160

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Trieman N, Leff J (1996) The TAPS projects. 36: The most difficult to place psychiatric in-patients. Outcome one year after relocation. Br J Psychiatry 169:289–292

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. UK Department of Mental Health (2002) Dual diagnosis good practice guide. UK Department of Health, London

    Google Scholar 

  41. WHO (1996) Psychosocial rehabilitation: a consensus statement. Division of Mental Health and Prevention of Substance Abuse. WHO, Geneva (Publication WHO/MNH/MND/96.2)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Wing JK, Furlong R (1986) A haven for the severely disabled within the context of a comprehensive psychiatric community service. Br J Psychiatry 149:449–457

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Wing JK et al (1998) Health of the Nation Outcome Scales Community Psychiatry (HoNOS) research and development. Br J Psychiatry 172:11–18

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The study was supported by a grant from the Italian National Institute of Health. Special thanks are due to Geoff Shepherd, Ph.D., and Richard Warner, M.D., for their very helpful comments.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Psychiatric Clinic, United Hospitals of Ancona and Politechnic University of Marche, Ancona, Italy

    Giovanni Santone

  2. Department of Mental Health, Azienda USL di Bologna, Viale Pepoli 5, 40123, Bologna, Italy

    Giovanni de Girolamo

  3. University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

    Ian Falloon

  4. Programme on Mental Health and Pathological Dependence, Azienda USL of Rimini, Rimini, Italy

    Angelo Fioritti

  5. Biostatistics, University of Trento, Trento, Italy

    Rocco Micciolo

  6. National Institute of Health, Rome, Italy

    Angelo Picardi

  7. Department of Mental Health and Piedmont Region Mental Health Sector, Turin, Italy

    Enrico Zanalda

Authors
  1. Giovanni Santone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Giovanni de Girolamo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ian Falloon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Angelo Fioritti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Rocco Micciolo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Angelo Picardi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Enrico Zanalda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Consortia

for the PROGRES Group

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Giovanni de Girolamo.

Additional information

The PROGRES Group includes: National Coordinators: G. de Girolamo, A. Picardi, P. Morosini (National Mental Health Project, National Institute of Health); Biostatistician: R. Micciolo (University of Trento); Regional Coordinators: P. Argentino, M. Casacchia, P. Ciliberti, G. Civenti, A. Colotto, G. Dell’Acqua, W. Di Munzio, G. Fagnano, A. Fioritti, N. Longhin, M. Miceli, M. Nicotera, M. Pisetta, R. Putzolu, E. Rossi, M. E. Rotunno, G. Borsetti, D. Semisa, R. Tomasi, P. Tulli, E. Zanalda; Researchers: C. Barbini, F. Basile, G. Bazzacco, R. Bracco, A. Calvarese, G. Canuso, E. Caroppo, L. Caserta, M. Colangione, S. Damiani, T. De Donatis, F. Di Donato, V. Di Michele, R. Esposito, M. Facchini, S. Ferraro, P. Fracchiolla, P. Gabriele, D. Gallicchio, G. Giardina, A. Greco, F. Grilletti, S. Guzzo, A. M. Lerario, M. R. Marinelli, C. Marino, E. Monzani, F. Picoco, L. Pinciaroli, C. A. Rossetti, P. Rubatta, G. Santone, F. Scorpiniti, V. Scrofani, M. Stefani, A. Svettini, A. Zaffarano, M. Cellini, A. Galli, K. Pesaresi, G. Pitzalis, L. Tarantino; Scientific Consultants: F. Amaddeo, I. Falloon

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

for the PROGRES Group., Santone, G., de Girolamo, G. et al. The process of care in residential facilities. Soc Psychiat Epidemiol 40, 540–550 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-005-0922-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-005-0922-1

Keywords

  • residential facility
  • process of care
  • luster analysis
  • long-term patients