Alberto Parabiaghi1, Hans E Kortrijk, Cornelis L Mulder. 1. Laboratory of Epidemiology and Social Psychiatry, IRCCS Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri, Via la Masa 19, 20156, Milan, Italy, parabiaghi@marionegri.it.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Using the reliable and clinically significant change approach, we aimed to identify meaningful outcome indicators for the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) and to combine them in a single model. We applied these indicators to the 1-year outcome of two large samples of people attending community mental health services in Italy (cohort 1) and the Netherlands (cohort 2). METHODS: Data were drawn from two studies on routine outcome assessment. The criteria for meaningful outcome were defined on both study cohorts and both language versions of the scale. The model combined (a) two criteria for adequate change (at least 4 or 8 points change), (b) two cut-offs for clinically significant change (a total score of 10 was the threshold between mild and moderate illness, 13 between moderate and severe illness), and (c) a method for classifying stable subjects in three degrees of severity (stable in mild, moderate or severe illness). Results were compared with those given by the effect size (ES) and analysis of variance and covariance (ANOVA and ANCOVA). RESULTS: For the proposed approach the outcome of cohort 1 was better than cohort 2, with 65-67% of its subjects showing a positive outcome compared to only 45-46%. The other reference methods (ES and ANOVA), however, showed a greater improvement for cohort 2. ANCOVA indicated that the differences were due to regression to the mean (RTM) which showed opposite effects across the two cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed approach proved valuable and generalizable for interpreting outcome on HoNOS, scarcely influenced by the RTM effect. Its introduction could benefit outcome evaluation and management.
PURPOSE: Using the reliable and clinically significant change approach, we aimed to identify meaningful outcome indicators for the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) and to combine them in a single model. We applied these indicators to the 1-year outcome of two large samples of people attending community mental health services in Italy (cohort 1) and the Netherlands (cohort 2). METHODS: Data were drawn from two studies on routine outcome assessment. The criteria for meaningful outcome were defined on both study cohorts and both language versions of the scale. The model combined (a) two criteria for adequate change (at least 4 or 8 points change), (b) two cut-offs for clinically significant change (a total score of 10 was the threshold between mild and moderate illness, 13 between moderate and severe illness), and (c) a method for classifying stable subjects in three degrees of severity (stable in mild, moderate or severe illness). Results were compared with those given by the effect size (ES) and analysis of variance and covariance (ANOVA and ANCOVA). RESULTS: For the proposed approach the outcome of cohort 1 was better than cohort 2, with 65-67% of its subjects showing a positive outcome compared to only 45-46%. The other reference methods (ES and ANOVA), however, showed a greater improvement for cohort 2. ANCOVA indicated that the differences were due to regression to the mean (RTM) which showed opposite effects across the two cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed approach proved valuable and generalizable for interpreting outcome on HoNOS, scarcely influenced by the RTM effect. Its introduction could benefit outcome evaluation and management.
Authors: Angelo Barbato; Alberto Parabiaghi; Francesco Panicali; Nadia Battino; Barbara D'Avanzo; Giovanni de Girolamo; Paola Rucci; Giovanni Santone Journal: Nord J Psychiatry Date: 2010-11-09 Impact factor: 2.202
Authors: Hans Erik Kortrijk; A B P Staring; A W B van Baars; C L Mulder Journal: Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol Date: 2009-05-02 Impact factor: 4.328
Authors: Jane E Pirkis; Philip M Burgess; Pia K Kirk; Sarity Dodson; Tim J Coombs; Michelle K Williamson Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2005-11-28 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Barry G Frost; Megan Turrell; Ketrina A Sly; Terry J Lewin; Agatha M Conrad; Suzanne Johnston; Srinivasan Tirupati; Kerry Petrovic; Sadanand Rajkumar Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2017-01-03 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Hans Kortrijk; Barbara Schaefer; Jaap van Weeghel; Cornelis L Mulder; Astrid Kamperman Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-01-09 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Edwin de Beurs; Matthijs Blankers; Philippe Delespaul; Erik van Duijn; Niels Mulder; Annet Nugter; Wilma Swildens; Bea G Tiemens; Jan Theunissen; Arno F A van Voorst; Jaap van Weeghel Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2018-07-13 Impact factor: 3.630