Centre for Health Economics, University of York, Heslington, York, UK.
Br J Psychiatry. 2011 Jul;199(1):71-6. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.110.079830. Epub 2011 Feb 3.
In 2000/01 crisis resolution and home treatment (CRHT) teams were introduced in England and have been associated in previous studies with reductions in in-patient admissions.
To examine whether the implementation of CRHT teams has been associated with reductions in admissions.
We used data from a previous national study for 229 primary care trusts (PCTs) between 1998/99 and 2003/04. We used a robust policy evaluation methodology to simultaneously examine temporal changes (PCTs before versus after the introduction of CRHT teams) and cross-sectional changes (PCTs with and without CRHT teams).
Controlling for various confounding factors, using different control groups and estimation methods, we find no significant differences in admissions between PCTs with and without CRHT teams.
Contrary to previous studies, we find no evidence that the CRHT policy per se has made any difference to admissions and suggest a need for more research on the policy as a whole.
2000/01 年危机解决和家庭治疗（CRHT）团队在英格兰推出，此前的研究表明，该团队与减少住院治疗有关。
研究 CRHT 团队的实施是否与减少住院有关。
我们使用了之前一项针对 1998/99 年至 2003/04 年 229 个初级保健信托（PCT）的全国性研究的数据。我们使用了一种稳健的政策评估方法，同时检查了时间变化（CRHT 团队引入前后的 PCT）和横截面变化（有和没有 CRHT 团队的 PCT）。
在控制了各种混杂因素、使用不同的对照组和估计方法后，我们发现有和没有 CRHT 团队的 PCT 之间的住院人数没有显著差异。
与之前的研究相反，我们没有发现 CRHT 政策本身对住院人数有任何影响的证据，并建议对整个政策进行更多的研究。
