Mariela L Lara-Cabrera1, Øyvind Salvesen2, Merete Berg Nesset3, Carlos De las Cuevas4, Valentina Cabral Iversen5, Rolf W Gråwe6. 1. Tiller Community Mental Health Centre, Division of Psychiatry, St. Olav's University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway; Department of Neuroscience, Faculty of Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway. Electronic address: mariela.lara@ntnu.no. 2. Unit for Applied Clinical Research, NTNU, Trondheim, Norway. 3. Center for Research and Education in Forensic Psychiatry, St. Olav's University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway. 4. Department of Internal Medicine, Dermatology and Psychiatry, University of La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain. 5. Department of Neuroscience, Faculty of Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway; Østmarka Department, Division of Psychiatry, St. Olav's University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway. 6. Department of Neuroscience, Faculty of Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway; Clinic of Substance Use and Addiction Medicine, St. Olav's University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: While there is growing interest in improving patient activation in general medical health services, there are too few randomized controlled trials in mental health settings which show how improvement can be achieved. Using the Patient Activation Measure-13 (PAM-13), we aimed to assess the effect of pre-treatment, peer co-led educational intervention on patient activation. Secondary outcomes included measures of patient satisfaction, well-being, mental health symptoms, motivation, and treatment participation. METHODS:Patients from two community mental health centres were randomized to a control group (CG, n=26) receiving treatment as usual, or an intervention group (IG, n=26) consisting of a four-hour group educational seminar (aiming to encourage patients to adopt an active role in their treatment) followed by treatment as usual. RESULTS: Only the IG improved on PAM-13, at one- and four-month follow-ups. The intervention had significant effects on patient satisfaction and treatment participation, compared to CG. CONCLUSION:Providing pre-treatment, peer co-led education improves patient activation in community mental health care settings. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The use of peers as co-educators may contribute to a different mental health care delivery, ensuring patient activation and participation in treatment. Further studies should examine peers' needs for supervision, challenges for the services, long-term and cost-benefit effects. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01601587.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: While there is growing interest in improving patient activation in general medical health services, there are too few randomized controlled trials in mental health settings which show how improvement can be achieved. Using the Patient Activation Measure-13 (PAM-13), we aimed to assess the effect of pre-treatment, peer co-led educational intervention on patient activation. Secondary outcomes included measures of patient satisfaction, well-being, mental health symptoms, motivation, and treatment participation. METHODS:Patients from two community mental health centres were randomized to a control group (CG, n=26) receiving treatment as usual, or an intervention group (IG, n=26) consisting of a four-hour group educational seminar (aiming to encourage patients to adopt an active role in their treatment) followed by treatment as usual. RESULTS: Only the IG improved on PAM-13, at one- and four-month follow-ups. The intervention had significant effects on patient satisfaction and treatment participation, compared to CG. CONCLUSION: Providing pre-treatment, peer co-led education improves patient activation in community mental health care settings. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The use of peers as co-educators may contribute to a different mental health care delivery, ensuring patient activation and participation in treatment. Further studies should examine peers' needs for supervision, challenges for the services, long-term and cost-benefit effects. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01601587.
Authors: Daniel David; Deborah E Barnes; Ryan D McMahan; Ying Shi; Mary T Katen; Rebecca L Sudore Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2018-08-21 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Femke Jansen; Veerle M H Coupé; Simone E J Eerenstein; C René Leemans; Irma M Verdonck-de Leeuw Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-11-03 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: John Morten Koksvik; Olav Morten Linaker; Rolf Wilhelm Gråwe; Johan Håkon Bjørngaard; Mariela Loreto Lara-Cabrera Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2018-08-29 Impact factor: 2.655