Lehman Anthony F.
Center for Mental Health Services Research, University of Maryland at Baltimore, 685 West Baltimore Street, MSTE Building, Room 300, Baltimore, MD 21201-1549, USA.
J Ment Health Policy Econ. 1998 Dec 1;1(4):199-204. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1099-176x(199812)1:4<199::aid-mhp22>3.0.co;2-z.
Significant gaps exist between scientific knowledge about the efficacy of treatments for mental disorders and the availability of efficacious treatments in routine practice. Mental health service research can help bridge this gap between basic clinical research and the usual care afforded adults with mental disorders. AIMS: To illustrate this potential, data on the efficacy of treatment for schizophrenia are reviewed. METHODS: The treatments reviewed include pharmacotherapies, psychological interventions, family interventions, vocational rehabilitation and assertive community treatment and case management. Using treatment recommendations based upon outcome data about these treatments and the results of a large survey of usual care for schizophrenia from the Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team (PORT) project, examples of current deficiencies in the usual treatment of adult mental disorders and relevant questions that need to be addressed by mental health services research are identified. RESULTS: Major deficiencies in treatment that were identified include inappropriate dosing with antipsychotic agents, underutilization of adjunctive antidepressant therapy, very low rates of prescription of psychosocial interventions and lack of continuity between inpatient and outpatient settings. DISCUSSION: These findings raise serious concerns about access to care and the appropriateness and quality of care that is offered. IMPLICATIONS: This knowledge about what treatments work for schizophrenia and the patterns of current care suggest the following major questions be addressed by mental health services research: What is the nature of care currently being offered adults with mental disorders? To what degree does this care measure up to scientifically derived quality of care and treatment standards? What is the effectiveness of new technologies under usual practice conditions? For which patients are they cost-effective and under what conditions? How should financial incentives be structured within systems of care to promote the most cost-effective use of new technologies? How should service systems themselves be organized to promote appropriate access and utilization? What educational, organizational and financing interventions promote adoption of effective interventions? Do we have valid methods for assessing quality of care? What strategies (interventions) are effective at improving the quality of care? In addition, we need to develop strategies that transfer mental health services research technologies into practice. These include: (i) development of outcome measures that meet scientific standards and that are practical for general application in service systems to facilitate "outcome management"; (ii) development of quality of care assessment methodologies that are practical and scientifically sound and (iii) cost-effectiveness methodologies. Mental health services research can facilitate the translation of knowledge developed from basic clinical research into more effective systems of care. The tools used by health services research to this end include examination of patterns of usual care in relation to scientifically established standards of efficacious care, interventions to improve the effectiveness of care and examination of the impacts of the organization and financing of services on outcomes and costs. In short, mental health service research holds high on its agenda the translation of basic and clinical research into practice. All of us must face the challenges posed by our rapidly changing mental health care system, changes driven not only by managed care and cost containment, but by exciting new developments in the treatment of mental disorders. We take on these challenges as researchers, clinicians, administrators, patients, families and taxpayers. Here I seek to provide a perspective on what we know about the treatment of adults with mental disorders and to discuss the implications of this knowledge for the work of mental health service research. Each of us has a particular window on this scene; mine is primarily that of a clinical mental health services researcher who studies schizophrenia. I will briefly summarize current knowledge about the efficacy of treatments for schizophrenia and the services research questions that this knowledge raises in its translation to clinical practice. The lessons from this examination readily generalize to the treatment of other adult mental disorders.
关于精神障碍治疗效果的科学知识与常规实践中有效治疗方法的可及性之间存在显著差距。心理健康服务研究有助于弥合基础临床研究与为成年精神障碍患者提供的常规护理之间的这一差距。目的:为说明这种潜力,对精神分裂症治疗效果的数据进行综述。方法:所综述的治疗方法包括药物治疗、心理干预、家庭干预、职业康复、积极社区治疗及病例管理。利用基于这些治疗方法的结果数据以及精神分裂症患者结果研究团队(PORT)项目对精神分裂症常规护理的大型调查结果所给出的治疗建议,确定成年精神障碍常规治疗中当前存在的不足示例以及心理健康服务研究需要解决的相关问题。结果:所确定的治疗方面的主要不足包括抗精神病药物剂量不当、辅助抗抑郁治疗利用不足、心理社会干预处方率极低以及住院和门诊环境之间缺乏连续性。讨论:这些发现引发了对获得护理的机会以及所提供护理的适宜性和质量的严重关切。启示:关于哪些治疗方法对精神分裂症有效以及当前护理模式的这些知识表明,心理健康服务研究应解决以下主要问题:目前为成年精神障碍患者提供的护理的性质是什么?这种护理在多大程度上符合科学得出的护理质量和治疗标准?在常规实践条件下新技术的有效性如何?它们对哪些患者具有成本效益以及在何种条件下具有成本效益?护理系统内的财务激励措施应如何构建以促进新技术的最具成本效益的使用?服务系统本身应如何组织以促进适当的获得和利用?哪些教育、组织和融资干预措施能促进有效干预措施的采用?我们是否有评估护理质量的有效方法?哪些策略(干预措施)能有效提高护理质量?此外,我们需要制定将心理健康服务研究技术转化为实践的策略。这些策略包括:(i)开发符合科学标准且在服务系统中普遍应用切实可行的结果测量方法,以促进“结果管理”;(ii)开发切实可行且科学合理的护理质量评估方法,以及(iii)成本效益方法。心理健康服务研究可促进将基础临床研究中产生的知识转化为更有效的护理系统。卫生服务研究为此目的所使用的工具包括对照科学确立的有效护理标准检查常规护理模式、提高护理效果的干预措施以及检查服务的组织和融资对结果及成本的影响。简而言之,心理健康服务研究将基础和临床研究转化为实践作为其首要议程。我们所有人都必须面对快速变化的心理健康护理系统带来的挑战,这些变化不仅由管理式护理和成本控制驱动,还由精神障碍治疗中令人兴奋的新进展驱动。作为研究人员、临床医生、管理人员、患者、家庭和纳税人,我们承担这些挑战。在此,我试图提供一个关于我们对成年精神障碍患者治疗的了解的视角,并讨论这些知识对心理健康服务研究工作的启示。我们每个人在这个场景中都有一个特定的视角;我的主要视角是作为一名研究精神分裂症的临床心理健康服务研究人员。我将简要总结关于精神分裂症治疗效果的当前知识以及将这些知识转化为临床实践时所引发的服务研究问题。此次审视所得出的经验教训很容易推广到其他成年精神障碍的治疗。