BACKGROUND: Less than optimal outcomes and escalating costs for chronic conditions including mental illness have prompted calls for innovative approaches to chronic illness management. AIMS: This study aimed to test the feasibility and utility of combining a generic, clinician administered and peer-led self-management group approach for people with serious mental illness. METHOD: General practitioners and mental health case managers used a patient-centred care model (the Flinders model) to assist 38 patients with serious mental illness to identify their self-management needs, and match these with interventions including Stanford peer-led, self-management groups and one-to-one peer support. Self-management and quality of life outcomes were measured and qualitative evaluation elicited feedback from all participants. RESULTS: Collaborative care planning, combined with a problems and goals focused approach, resulted in improved self-management and mental functioning at 3 to 6 months follow-up. The Stanford self-management course was applicable and acceptable to patients with serious mental illnesses. Qualitative feedback was highly supportive of this approach. CONCLUSIONS: Generic, structured assessment and care planning approaches, resulting in self-management education targeted to the individual, improved self-management and quality of life. Patients and service providers reported considerable gains despite the challenges associated with introducing a generic model within the mental health and general practice sector.
BACKGROUND: Less than optimal outcomes and escalating costs for chronic conditions including mental illness have prompted calls for innovative approaches to chronic illness management. AIMS: This study aimed to test the feasibility and utility of combining a generic, clinician administered and peer-led self-management group approach for people with serious mental illness. METHOD: General practitioners and mental health case managers used a patient-centred care model (the Flinders model) to assist 38 patients with serious mental illness to identify their self-management needs, and match these with interventions including Stanford peer-led, self-management groups and one-to-one peer support. Self-management and quality of life outcomes were measured and qualitative evaluation elicited feedback from all participants. RESULTS: Collaborative care planning, combined with a problems and goals focused approach, resulted in improved self-management and mental functioning at 3 to 6 months follow-up. The Stanford self-management course was applicable and acceptable to patients with serious mental illnesses. Qualitative feedback was highly supportive of this approach. CONCLUSIONS: Generic, structured assessment and care planning approaches, resulting in self-management education targeted to the individual, improved self-management and quality of life. Patients and service providers reported considerable gains despite the challenges associated with introducing a generic model within the mental health and general practice sector.
Authors: Karen L Whiteman; John A Naslund; Elizabeth A DiNapoli; Martha L Bruce; Stephen J Bartels Journal: Psychiatr Serv Date: 2016-06-15 Impact factor: 3.084
Authors: Karen L Fortuna; Kelly A Aschbrenner; Matthew C Lohman; Jessica Brooks; Mark Salzer; Robert Walker; Lisa St George; Stephen J Bartels Journal: Psychiatr Q Date: 2018-12
Authors: Judith A Cook; Mary Ellen Copeland; Jessica A Jonikas; Marie M Hamilton; Lisa A Razzano; Dennis D Grey; Carol B Floyd; Walter B Hudson; Rachel T Macfarlane; Tina M Carter; Sherry Boyd Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2011-03-14 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Benjamin G Druss; Manasvini Singh; Silke A von Esenwein; Gretl E Glick; Stephanie Tapscott; Sherry Jenkins Tucker; Cathy A Lally; Evelina W Sterling Journal: Psychiatr Serv Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 3.084