D Siskind1, M Harris, J Pirkis, H Whiteford. 1. Queensland Centre for Mental Health Research, School of Population Health, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. dan_siskind@qcmhr.uq.edu.au
Abstract
AIMS: Personalised support services assist patients with severe and persistent mental illness (SPMI) to live with functional deficits by providing living skills, emotional support, community access and advocacy. This paper aims to systematically review the evidence for personalised support. METHODS: Systematic searches of Medline, PsycINFO and Google Scholar (inception to March 2011) identified studies investigating patient outcomes for personalised support services. The quality of the selected studies was assessed. The strength of evidence for the three categories of patient outcomes (illness acuity, personal functioning and patient satisfaction) was graded. RESULTS: Fifteen studies met inclusion criteria with most rated as having moderate or weak study designs. The selected studies evaluated programs for outpatients with SPMI. There was moderate strength of evidence for reducing illness acuity and improving patient satisfaction with services, and weak strength of evidence for improving personal functioning in studies published to date. Most programs delivered multiple service types, and no clear pattern of service types leading to specific patient outcomes could be discerned. CONCLUSIONS: Although evidence published to date for personalised support is of variable quality, it suggests that services may be effective. More research on the effects of personalised support subtypes on patient outcomes is required.
AIMS: Personalised support services assist patients with severe and persistent mental illness (SPMI) to live with functional deficits by providing living skills, emotional support, community access and advocacy. This paper aims to systematically review the evidence for personalised support. METHODS: Systematic searches of Medline, PsycINFO and Google Scholar (inception to March 2011) identified studies investigating patient outcomes for personalised support services. The quality of the selected studies was assessed. The strength of evidence for the three categories of patient outcomes (illness acuity, personal functioning and patient satisfaction) was graded. RESULTS: Fifteen studies met inclusion criteria with most rated as having moderate or weak study designs. The selected studies evaluated programs for outpatients with SPMI. There was moderate strength of evidence for reducing illness acuity and improving patient satisfaction with services, and weak strength of evidence for improving personal functioning in studies published to date. Most programs delivered multiple service types, and no clear pattern of service types leading to specific patient outcomes could be discerned. CONCLUSIONS: Although evidence published to date for personalised support is of variable quality, it suggests that services may be effective. More research on the effects of personalised support subtypes on patient outcomes is required.
Authors: Dan Siskind; Meredith Harris; Steve Kisely; Victor Siskind; James Brogan; Jane Pirkis; David Crompton; Harvey Whiteford Journal: Community Ment Health J Date: 2013-10-23
Authors: Emma Morton; Venkat Bhat; Peter Giacobbe; Wendy Lou; Erin E Michalak; Shane McInerney; Trisha Chakrabarty; Benicio N Frey; Roumen V Milev; Daniel J Müller; Sagar V Parikh; Susan Rotzinger; Sidney H Kennedy; Raymond W Lam Journal: CNS Drugs Date: 2021-04-16 Impact factor: 5.749
Authors: K Trevillion; S Byford; M Cary; D Rose; S Oram; G Feder; R Agnew-Davies; L M Howard Journal: Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci Date: 2013-04-30 Impact factor: 6.892
Authors: Nathalie Eikelenboom; Ivo Smeele; Marjan Faber; Annelies Jacobs; Frank Verhulst; Joyca Lacroix; Michel Wensing; Jan van Lieshout Journal: BMC Fam Pract Date: 2015-11-11 Impact factor: 2.497