BACKGROUND: Routine use of standardised outcome measures is not universal. AIMS: To evaluate the effectiveness of standardised outcome assessment. METHOD: A randomised controlled trial, involving 160 representative adult mental health patients and paired staff (ISRCTN16971059). The intervention group (n=101) (a) completed monthly postal questionnaires assessing needs, quality of life, mental health problem severity and therapeutic alliance, and (b) received 3-monthly feedback. The control group (n=59) received treatment as usual. RESULTS: The intervention did not improve primary outcomes of patient-rated unmet need and of quality of life. Other subjective secondary outcome measures were also not improved. The intervention reduced psychiatric inpatient days (3.5 v.16.4 mean days, bootstrapped 95% CI1.6-25.7), and hence service use costs were 2586 UK pounds (95% CI 102-5391) less for intervention-group patients. Net benefit analysis indicated that the intervention was cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Routine use of outcome measures as implemented in this study did not improve subjective outcomes, but was associated with reduced psychiatric inpatient admissions.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Routine use of standardised outcome measures is not universal. AIMS: To evaluate the effectiveness of standardised outcome assessment. METHOD: A randomised controlled trial, involving 160 representative adult mental health patients and paired staff (ISRCTN16971059). The intervention group (n=101) (a) completed monthly postal questionnaires assessing needs, quality of life, mental health problem severity and therapeutic alliance, and (b) received 3-monthly feedback. The control group (n=59) received treatment as usual. RESULTS: The intervention did not improve primary outcomes of patient-rated unmet need and of quality of life. Other subjective secondary outcome measures were also not improved. The intervention reduced psychiatric inpatient days (3.5 v.16.4 mean days, bootstrapped 95% CI1.6-25.7), and hence service use costs were 2586 UK pounds (95% CI 102-5391) less for intervention-group patients. Net benefit analysis indicated that the intervention was cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Routine use of outcome measures as implemented in this study did not improve subjective outcomes, but was associated with reduced psychiatric inpatient admissions.
Authors: J Williams; M Leamy; V Bird; C Harding; J Larsen; C Le Boutillier; L Oades; M Slade Journal: Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol Date: 2012-02-10 Impact factor: 4.328
Authors: Marjan Drukker; Kim van Dillen; Maarten Bak; Ron Mengelers; Jim van Os; Philippe Delespaul Journal: Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 4.328
Authors: Amy M Kilbourne; Kathryn Beck; Brigitta Spaeth-Rublee; Parashar Ramanuj; Robert W O'Brien; Naomi Tomoyasu; Harold Alan Pincus Journal: World Psychiatry Date: 2018-02 Impact factor: 49.548
Authors: Susan V Eisen; Kathryn A Bottonari; Mark E Glickman; Avron Spiro; Mark R Schultz; Lawrence Herz; Robert Rosenheck; Ethan S Rofman Journal: J Behav Health Serv Res Date: 2011-04 Impact factor: 1.505
Authors: M Drukker; M Joore; J van Os; S Sytema; G Driessen; M Bak; Ph Delespaul Journal: Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci Date: 2012-05-22 Impact factor: 6.892
Authors: Tony Kendrick; Magdy El-Gohary; Beth Stuart; Simon Gilbody; Rachel Churchill; Laura Aiken; Abhishek Bhattacharya; Amy Gimson; Anna L Brütt; Kim de Jong; Michael Moore Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2016-07-13