Supported Housing for People with Severe Mental Disorders

Background There has been a significant reduction in the number of people with severe mental illness who spend extended periods in long-stay hospitals. District health authorities, local authorities, housing associations and voluntary organisations are jointly expected to provide support for people with severe mental disorder/s. This 'support' may well involve some kind of special housing. Objectives To determine the effects of supported housing schemes compared with outreach support schemes or 'standard care' for people with severe mental disorder/s living in the community. Search methods For the 2006 update we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (April 2006) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, 2006 Issue 2). Selection criteria We included all relevant randomised, or quasi-randomised, trials dealing with people with 'severe mental disorder/s' allocated to supported housing, compared with outreach support schemes or standard care. We focused on outcomes of service utilisation, mental state, satisfaction with care, social functioning, quality of life and economic data. Data collection and analysis We reliably selected studies, quality rated them and undertook data extraction. For dichotomous data, we would have estimated relative risks (RR), with the 95% confidence intervals (CI). Where possible, we would have calculated the number needed to treat statistic (NNT). We would have carried out analysis by intention-to-treat and would have summated normal continuous data using the weighted mean difference (WMD). We would have presented scale data for only those tools that had attained pre-specified levels of quality and undertaken tests for heterogeneity and publication bias. Main results Although 139 citations were acquired from the searches, no study met the inclusion criteria. Authors' conclusions Dedicated schemes whereby people with severe mental illness are located within one site or building with assistance from professional workers have potential for great benefit as they provide a 'safe haven' for people in need of stability and support. This, however, may be at the risk of increasing dependence on professionals and prolonging exclusion from the community. Whether or not the benefits outweigh the risks can only be a matter of opinion in the absence of reliable evidence. There is an urgent need to investigate the effects of supported housing on people with severe mental illness within a randomised trial.

Subjective and Objective Indicators of Recovery in Severe Mental Illness: a Cross-Sectional Study

Background: This study aimed to determine whether subjective dimensions of recovery such as empowerment are associated with self-report of more objective indicators such as level of participation in the community and income from employment. A secondary aim was to investigate the extent to which diagnosis or other consumer characteristics mediated any relationship between these variables. Methods: The Community Integration Measure, the Empowerment Scale, the Recovery Assessment Scale, and the Camberwell Assessment of Needs Short Appraisal Schedule were administered to a convenience sample of 161 consumers with severe mental illness. Results: The majority of participants had a primary diagnosis of schizophreniform, anxiety/depression or bipolar affective disorder. The Empowerment Scale was quite strongly correlated with the Recovery Assessment Scale and the Community Integration Measure. Participants with a diagnosis of bipolar affective disorder had signifi cantly higher recovery and empowerment scores than participants with schizophrenia or depression. Both empowerment and recovery scores were significantly higher for people engaged in paid employment than for those receiving social security benefits. Conclusions: The measurement of subjective dimensions of recovery such as empowerment has validity in evaluation of global recovery for people with severe mental illness. A diagnosis of bipolar disorder is associated with higher scores on subjective and objective indicators of recovery.

Effectiveness of a Multi-Component Smoking Cessation Support Programme (McSCSP) for Patients with Severe Mental Disorders: Study Design

Only a few studies have examined the efficacy and safety of smoking cessation programmes in patients with mental disorders. The aim of this paper is to describe in detail the methodology used in the study as well as the Multi-component Smoking Cessation Support Programme in terms of pharmacological treatments and psychological interventions. An open-label 9-month follow-up study was conducted in Spain. A total of 82 clinically stable outpatients with schizophrenia, schizoaffective or bipolar disorder were enrolled. Treatment consisted of a programme specifically developed by the research team for individuals with severe mental disorders. The programme consisted of two phases: (1) weekly individual motivational therapy for 4-12 weeks, and (2) a 12-week active treatment phase. During this phase, at each study visit patients received a one- or two-week supply of medication (transdermal nicotine patches, varenicline or bupropion) with instructions on how to take it, in addition to group psychotherapy for smoking cessation. Evaluations were performed: (1) at the time of enrolment in the study, (2) during the 12-week active treatment phase of the study (weekly for the first 4 weeks and then biweekly), and (3) after the end of this phase (two follow-up assessments at weeks 12 and 24). Evaluations included: (1) smoking history, (2) substance use, (3) psychopathology, (4) adverse events, and (5) laboratory tests. The importance of this study lies in addressing a topical issue often ignored by psychiatrists: the unacceptably high rates of tobacco use in patients with severe mental disorders.

Description of the risk factors for relapse in patients diagnosed with severe mental disorders

Objective: The objective of this paper is to describe the population served in mental health institutionsfor mental illness relapse, and the process of identifying risk factors in relapsing patientsdiagnosed with severe mental illness. To this end a descriptive exploratory multicenter, multistageepidemiological study was carried out in mental health institutions of the Order of San Juan deDios Hospital (OHSJD) with hospitalized relapsing patients with a diagnosis of severe mentaldisorder. This study comes from a working network of Psychology professionals in the OHSJDnationwide. Materials and methods: The population sample was of 1005 patients diagnosed withsevere mental disorders, who had presented relapse during the last year. First, the characterizationof the general population was conducted; then, it was narrowed down to the centers, taking intoaccount similarities and differences found according to the clinical and demographic variables.Results: Major risk factors for relapse found in patients diagnosed with severe mental disorderswere: having between 38 and 58 years of age, being female, single, graduates, unemployed, witha prevalence of bipolar affective disorder diagnosis, number of hospitalizations between 2 and10, number of drugs at the time of leaving hospital 2 to 6, with severe difficulties relating withothers and difficulties in adherence to treatment. The need for a caregiver was also found, as wellas a limited number of received psychological interventions. How the system of beliefs affects thedisease and the poor adherence to treatment was identified. Conclusions: These results indicatethe requirement of a design of team intervention strategies, ranging from the assessment team(home), definition of therapeutic action plans (for) and the posthospitalizacion (egress) following.There is a poor support network and limited adherence to comprehensive treatment.

Psychiatric adverse effects of zonisamide in patients with epilepsy and mental disorder comorbidities

Over the last few years, zonisamide has been proposed as a potentially useful medication for patients with focal seizures, with or without secondary generalization. Since psychiatric adverse effects, including mania, psychosis, and suicidal ideation, have been associated with its use, it was suggested that the presence of antecedent psychiatric disorders is an important factor associated with the discontinuation of zonisamide therapy in patients with epilepsy. We, therefore, set out to assess the tolerability profile of zonisamide in a retrospective chart review of 23 patients with epilepsy and comorbid mental disorders, recruited from two specialist pediatric (n=11) and adult (n=12) neuropsychiatry clinics. All patients had a clinical diagnosis of treatment-refractory epilepsy after extensive neurophysiological and neuroimaging investigations. The vast majority of patients (n=22/23, 95.7%) had tried previous antiepileptic medications, and most adult patients (n=9/11, 81.8%) were on concomitant medication for epilepsy. In the majority of cases, the psychiatric adverse effects of zonisamide were not severe. Four patients (17.4%) discontinued zonisamide because of lack of efficacy, whereas only one patient (4.3%) discontinued it because of the severity of psychiatric adverse effects (major depressive disorder). The low discontinuation rate of zonisamide in a selected population of patients with epilepsy and neuropsychiatric comorbidity suggests that this medication is safe and reasonably well-tolerated for use in patients with treatment-refractory epilepsy. Given the limitations of the present study, including the relatively small sample size, further research is warranted to confirm this finding. © 2013 Elsevier Inc.

Patient satisfaction with treatment for alcohol use disorders: comparing patients with and without severe mental health symptoms

BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggest patients with co-occurring alcohol use disorders (AUDs) and severe mental health symptoms (SMHS) are less satisfied with standard AUD treatment when compared to patients with an AUD alone. This study compared patient satisfaction with standard AUD treatment among patients with and without SMHS and explored how standard treatment might be improved to better address the needs of these patients.

METHODS: Eighty-nine patients receiving treatment for an AUD either at an inpatient hospital, outpatient clinic, inpatient detoxification, or residential/therapeutic community services were surveyed. Patient satisfaction with treatment was assessed using the Treatment Perception Questionnaire (range: 0-40). Patients were stratified according to their score on the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale. Forty patients scored in the extremely severe range of depression (score >14) and/or anxiety (score >10) (indicating SMHS) and 49 patients did not. An inductive content analysis was also conducted on qualitative data relating to areas of service improvement.

RESULTS: Patients with SMHS were found to be equally satisfied with treatment (mean =25.10, standard deviation =8.12) as patients with an AUD alone (mean =25.43, standard deviation =6.91). Analysis revealed that being an inpatient in hospital was associated with reduced treatment satisfaction. Patients with SMHS were found to be significantly less satisfied with staffs' understanding of the type of help they wanted in treatment, when compared to patients with AUDs alone. Five areas for service improvement were identified, including staff qualities, informed care, treatment access and continuity, issues relating to inpatient stay, and addressing patients' mental health needs.

CONCLUSION: While findings suggest that AUD treatment services adequately meet the needs of patients with SMHS in treatment, patients with SMHS do feel that staff lack understanding of their treatment needs. Findings have important implications as to how current health care practice might be improved according to the patient's perspective of care.

Current evidence on integrated treatment for serious mental disorder and substance misuse

Substance misuse in people with serious mental disorders is common and has a wideranging negative impact. The multiplicity of problems suggests that this comorbidity is better conceptualized as a type of complex disorder than by ‘dual diagnosis’. Problems with sequential and parallel treatments have led to the development of integrated approaches, with one practitioner or team addressing both the substance use and mental disorder. These treatments are typically characterized by motivation enhancement, minimizing treatment-related stress, emphasizing harm reduction as well as abstinence, and assertive outreach. A review of published randomized trials demonstrates that superior effects to controls are rarely consistent across treatment foci and over time. While motivational interventions assist engagement, more intervention is usually required for integrated treatment programs to improve long-term outcomes more than control conditions. More intensive case management does not consistently improve impact, but extended cognitive-behavioral therapies have promise. Suggestions for maximizing treatment effects and improving research evidence are provided.

Implementing low intensity CBT in case management of clients with severe mental illness

In a previous chapter (Dean and Kavanagh, Chapter 37), the authors made a case for applying low intensity (LI) cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) to people with serious mental illness (SMI). As in other populations, LI CBT interventions typically deal with circumscribed problems or behaviours. LI CBT retains an emphasis on self-management, has restricted content and segment length, and does not necessarily require extensive CBT training. In applying these interventions to SMI, adjustments may be needed to address cognitive and symptomatic difficulties often faced by these groups. What may take a single session in a less affected population may require several sessions or a thematic application of the strategy within case management. In some cases, the LI CBT may begin to appear more like a high-intensity (HI) intervention, albeit simple and with many LI CBT characteristics still retained. So, if goal setting were introduced in one or two sessions, it could clearly be seen as an LI intervention. When applied to several different situations and across many sessions, it may be indistinguishable from a simple HI treatment, even if it retains the same format and is effectively applied by a practitioner with limited CBT training. ----- ----- In some ways, LI CBT should be well suited to case management of patients with SMI. treating staff typically have heavy workloads, and find it difficult to apply time-consuming treatments (Singh et al. 2003). LI CBT may allow provision of support to greater numbers of service users, and allow staff to spend more time on those who need intensive and sustained support. However, the introduction of any change in practice has to address significant challenges, and LI CBT is no exception. ----- ----- Many of the issues that we face in applying LI CBT to routine case management in a mnetal health service and their potential solutions are essentially the same as in a range of other problem domains (Turner and Sanders 2006)- and, indeed, are similar to those in any adoption of innovation (Rogers 2003). Over the last 20 years, several commentators have described barriers to implementing evidence-based innovations in mental health services (Corrigan et al. 1992; Deane et al. 2006; Kavanagh et al. 1993). The aim of the current chapter is to present a cognitive behavioural conceptualisation of problems and potential solutions for dissemination of LI CBT.

Adapting low intensity CBT interventions for clients with severe mental illness

Many people with severe mental illness (SMI) such as schizophrenia, whose psychotic symptoms are effectively managed, continue to experience significant functional problems. This chapter argues that low intensity (LI) cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT; e.g. for depression, anxiety, or other issues) is applicable to these clients, and that LI CBT can be consistent with long-term case management. However, adjustments to LI CBT strategies are often necessary and boundaries between LI CBT and high intensity (HI) CBT (with more extensive practitioner contact and complexity) may become blurred. Our focus is on LI CBT's self-management emphasis, its restricted content and segment length, and potential use after limited training. In addition to exploring these issues, it draws on the authors' Collaborative Recovery (CR; Oades et al. 2005) and 'Start Over and Survive' programs (Kavanagh et al. 2004) as examples. ----- ----- Evidence for the effectiveness of LI CBT with severe mental illness is often embedded within multicomponent programs. For example, goal setting and therapeutic homework are common components of such programs, but they can also be used as discrete LI CBT interventions. A review of 40 randomised controlled trials involving recipients with schizophrenia or other sever mental illnesses has identified key components of illness management programs (Mueser et al. 2002). However, it is relatively rare for specific components of these complex interventions to be assessed in isolation. Given these constraints, the evidence for specific LI CBT interventions with severe mental ilnness is relatively limited.

A Taxonomy for Homework Used by Mental Health Case Managers When Working with Individuals Diagnosed with Severe Mental Illness

A survey was completed by 122 case managers describing the types of homework assignments commonly used with individuals diagnosed with severe mental illness (SMI). Homework types were categorized using a 12-item homework description taxonomy and in relation to the 22 domains of the Camberwell Assessment of Need (CAN). Case managers predominately reported using behaviourally based homework tasks such as scheduling activities and the development of personal hygiene skills. Homework focused on CAN areas of need in relation to Company, Psychological Distress, Psychotic Symptoms and Daytime Activities. The applications of the taxonomy for both researchers and case managers are discussed.

Enhancing employment services for people with severe mental illness: the challenge of the Australian service environment

Objectives:  Comparatively few people with severe mental illness are employed despite evidence that many people within this group wish to obtain, can obtain and sustain employment, and that employment can contribute to recovery. This investigation aimed to: (i) describe the current policy and service environment within which people with severe mental illness receive employment services; (ii) identify evidence-based practices that improve employment outcomes for people with severe mental illness; (iii) determine the extent to which the current Australian policy environment is consistent with the implementation of evidence-based employment services for people with severe mental illness; and (iv) identify methods and priorities for enhancing employment services for Australians with severe mental illness through implementation of evidence-based practices. Method:  Current Australian practices were identified, having reference to policy and legal documents, funding body requirements and anecdotal reports. Evidence-based employment services for people with severe mental illness were identified through examination of published reviews and the results of recent controlled trials. Results:  Current policy settings support the provision of employment services for people with severe mental illness separate from clinical services. Recent studies have identified integration of clinical and employment services as a major factor in the effectiveness of employment services. This is usually achieved through co-location of employment and mental health services. Conclusions:  Optimal evidence-based employment services are needed by Australians with severe mental illness. Providing optimal services is a challenge in the current policy environment. Service integration may be achieved through enhanced intersectoral links between employment and mental health service providers as well as by co-locating employment specialists within a mental health care setting.

Creative writing in recovery from severe mental illness

There is evidence that creative writing forms an important part of the recovery experience of people affected by severe mental illness. In this paper, we consider theoretical models that explain how creative writing might contribute to recovery, and we discuss the potential for creative writing in psychosocial rehabilitation. We argue that the rehabilitation benefits of creative writing might be optimized through focus on process and technique in writing, rather than content, and that consequently, the involvement of professional writers might be important. We describe a pilot workshop that deployed these principles and was well-received by participants. Finally, we make recommendations regarding the role of creative writing in psychosocial rehabilitation for people recovering from severe mental illness and suggest that the development of an evidence base regarding the effectiveness of creative writing is a priority.

Creative writing: A practice-based account of designing and facilitating life-writing workshops for a group With severe mental illness

This chapter is based on the experience and findings of a pilot project developed to investigate the feasibility of providing a writing workshop for people participating in psychosocial rehabilitation programmes provided by a non-government agency in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. It was a qualitative study, making use of observational data, interviews with participants, and informal reports. We did not seek to test theoretical models concerning the link between creative writing and recovery through the pilot project, but rather to evaluate the immediate impact of a writing workshop conducted in the manner outlined in the preceding chapter by Philip Neilsen (chapter 7).