Jennifer S Volk1, Tim Aubry1, Paula Goering2, Carol E Adair3, Jino Distasio4, Jonathan Jette1, Danielle Nolin5, Vicky Stergiopoulos6, David L Streiner2,7, Sam Tsemberis8. 1. a School of Psychology & Centre for Research on Educational and Community Services, University of Ottawa , Ottawa , ON , Canada . 2. b Department of Psychiatry , Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, University of Toronto , Toronto , ON , Canada . 3. c Departments of Psychiatry and Community Health Sciences , University of Calgary , Calgary , Alberta , Canada . 4. d Department of Geography & Institute of Urban Studies , University of Winnipeg , Winnipeg , Manitoba , Canada . 5. e Centre de Recherche et de Développement, Université de Moncton, Moncton , New Brunswick , Canada . 6. f Department of Psychiatry & Centre for Research on Inner City Health , St.-Michael's Hospital , Toronto , Ontario , Canada . 7. g Department of Psychiatry and Behavioural Neurosciences , McMaster University , Hamilton , ON , and. 8. h Pathways to Housing Inc. , New York , NY , USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: At Home/Chez-Soi was a 24 month randomized controlled trial of Housing First (HF) conducted in five Canadian cities. AIMS: This article attempts to identify the characteristics of participants who experienced housing instability one year after entering HF. METHODS: Those defined as experiencing housing instability were housed <50% of the last 9 months of the first year, excluding time in institutions, unless they were housed 100% of the past 3 months. RESULTS: Only 13.5% of HFparticipants (n = 157/1162) met criteria for housing instability. Several variables were significant predictors of instability in between-group comparisons and multiple regression analyses: residence in Winnipeg, cumulative lifetime homelessness, percent of previous 3 months spent in jail, and community psychological integration; while residence in Moncton and a diagnosis of PTSD or panic disorder predicted stability. The predictive models were weak, identifying correctly only 3.8% of individuals that failed to achieve housing stability. CONCLUSIONS: It is not possible to predict confidently at baseline who will experience early housing instability in HF. There are certain individual characteristics that might be considered risk factors. Providing HF to all individuals who qualify for a HF program remains the most valid way to administer admission to housing.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: At Home/Chez-Soi was a 24 month randomized controlled trial of Housing First (HF) conducted in five Canadian cities. AIMS: This article attempts to identify the characteristics of participants who experienced housing instability one year after entering HF. METHODS: Those defined as experiencing housing instability were housed <50% of the last 9 months of the first year, excluding time in institutions, unless they were housed 100% of the past 3 months. RESULTS: Only 13.5% of HF participants (n = 157/1162) met criteria for housing instability. Several variables were significant predictors of instability in between-group comparisons and multiple regression analyses: residence in Winnipeg, cumulative lifetime homelessness, percent of previous 3 months spent in jail, and community psychological integration; while residence in Moncton and a diagnosis of PTSD or panic disorder predicted stability. The predictive models were weak, identifying correctly only 3.8% of individuals that failed to achieve housing stability. CONCLUSIONS: It is not possible to predict confidently at baseline who will experience early housing instability in HF. There are certain individual characteristics that might be considered risk factors. Providing HF to all individuals who qualify for a HF program remains the most valid way to administer admission to housing.
Authors: Carol E Adair; David L Streiner; Ryan Barnhart; Brianna Kopp; Scott Veldhuizen; Michelle Patterson; Tim Aubry; Jennifer Lavoie; Jitender Sareen; Stefanie Renée LeBlanc; Paula Goering Journal: Can J Psychiatry Date: 2016-07-09 Impact factor: 4.356