Bruns Eric J, Pullmann Michael D, Sather April, Denby Brinson Ramona, Ramey Michelle
School of Medicine, University of Washington, 2815 Eastlake Ave E, Suite 200, Seattle, WA, 98102-3086, USA,
Adm Policy Ment Health. 2015 May;42(3):309-22. doi: 10.1007/s10488-014-0571-3.
In this study, we compared service experiences and outcomes for youths with serious emotional disorder (SED) randomly assigned to care coordination via a defined wraparound process (n = 47) versus more traditional intensive case management (ICM; n = 46) The wraparound group received more mean hours of care management and services; however, there ultimately were no group differences in restrictiveness of residential placement, emotional and behavioral symptoms, or functioning. Wraparound implementation fidelity was found to be poor. Organizational culture and climate, and worker morale, were poorer for the wraparound providers than the ICM group. Results suggest that, for less-impaired youths with SED, less intensive options such as ICM may be equally effective to poor-quality wraparound delivered in the absence of wraparound implementation supports and favorable system conditions.
在本研究中,我们比较了通过明确的综合服务流程被随机分配至照护协调的重度情绪障碍(SED)青少年(n = 47)与接受更传统的强化个案管理(ICM;n = 46)的青少年的服务体验和结果。综合服务组接受了更多平均时长的照护管理和服务;然而,在居住安置的限制程度、情绪和行为症状或功能方面最终并无组间差异。结果发现综合服务实施的保真度较差。与ICM组相比,综合服务提供者的组织文化和氛围以及工作人员士气较差。结果表明,对于病情较轻的SED青少年,在缺乏综合服务实施支持和有利系统条件的情况下,像ICM这样强度较低的选项可能与质量较差的综合服务同样有效。