AIMS: Assertive community treatment (ACT) is known to have a positive impact on the number and length of inpatient stays. However, recent studies have shown little or no effect of such programs in European settings. This paper aims to describe the impact of a newly implemented ACT program on patients and their families' burden. Predictive factors have also been examined. METHOD: Fifty-five patients characterized by heavy use of psychiatric care, numerous hospitalizations, or failure to link with outpatient psychiatric care and their relatives were followed. Data were gathered on patients before and after follow up as well as on relatives' burden and costs. The number and domains of clinician interventions have been detailed. RESULTS: The ACT program had a positive effect on symptoms, psychosocial adaptation and quality of life. Age was the most significant predictor of changes. Older patients, most of them suffering from delusional disorders, showed no improvement or even some impairment. Finally, the program appeared to have a marked effect on easing families' burden in domains such as assistance in daily life activities and costs. CONCLUSIONS: ACT appears to be recommended for patients with poor outcome when treated in other settings. Early intervention seems to be justified as highlighted by younger age being the best predictor of positive changes. Families can be helped considerably, particularly those confronted with patients with persistent disturbing symptoms which do not, however, warrant hospitalization. Finally, the fact that patients with delusional disorder do not seem to improve warrants further research.
AIMS: Assertive community treatment (ACT) is known to have a positive impact on the number and length of inpatient stays. However, recent studies have shown little or no effect of such programs in European settings. This paper aims to describe the impact of a newly implemented ACT program on patients and their families' burden. Predictive factors have also been examined. METHOD: Fifty-five patients characterized by heavy use of psychiatric care, numerous hospitalizations, or failure to link with outpatientpsychiatric care and their relatives were followed. Data were gathered on patients before and after follow up as well as on relatives' burden and costs. The number and domains of clinician interventions have been detailed. RESULTS: The ACT program had a positive effect on symptoms, psychosocial adaptation and quality of life. Age was the most significant predictor of changes. Older patients, most of them suffering from delusional disorders, showed no improvement or even some impairment. Finally, the program appeared to have a marked effect on easing families' burden in domains such as assistance in daily life activities and costs. CONCLUSIONS: ACT appears to be recommended for patients with poor outcome when treated in other settings. Early intervention seems to be justified as highlighted by younger age being the best predictor of positive changes. Families can be helped considerably, particularly those confronted with patients with persistent disturbing symptoms which do not, however, warrant hospitalization. Finally, the fact that patients with delusional disorder do not seem to improve warrants further research.