• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

针对有再住院风险的精神病患者的强化多模式团体方案:一项对照干预研究。

An intensive multimodal group programme for patients with psychotic disorders at risk of rehospitalization: a controlled intervention study.

机构信息

Yulius Mental Health, PO Box 1001, 3300 BA, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.

Epidemiological and Social Psychiatric Research Institute (ESPRi), Department of Psychiatry, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Postbus 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

BMC Psychiatry. 2019 Aug 5;19(1):241. doi: 10.1186/s12888-019-2229-x.

DOI:10.1186/s12888-019-2229-x
PMID:31382937
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6683433/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

On the basis of earlier experiences in Germany and England, we developed an intensive multimodal group programme (FACT Plus) for psychotic-spectrum patients. By combining it with regular Flexible Assertive Community Treatment (FACT) (care as usual), we intended to reduce psychiatric rehospitalizations and mental healthcare costs.

METHODS

We included adult patients (>18 years) with a psychotic spectrum disorder who had had at least one psychiatric admission in the 2 years before inclusion. FACT Plus was delivered weekly for 9 months. The intervention group was recruited in northern Rotterdam (the Netherlands), and the control group was recruited in southern Rotterdam. The primary outcome measure was length of stay (LOS) and the secondary outcome measures were mental healthcare costs and compulsory admissions.

RESULTS

We included 52 patients in the intervention group and 61 patients in the control group. During the 12-month observation period, the mean LOS per patient was 15.2 (intervention group) and 34.6 (control group). This represents a difference of 19.4 days (56.1%). This result was statistically significant (B = -.859, SE = .497, p = .042) in a regression model correcting for baseline differences between the groups. Mean total mental healthcare costs per patient were €21,098 in the intervention group) versus €25,054 in the control group, a difference of about €4000 per patient (16%). In addition, there were zero compulsory admissions in the intervention group and nine in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

After the addition of FACT Plus to regular FACT, psychiatric LOS was substantially lower in the intervention group than in the control group. This result was accompanied by a limited reduction in mental healthcare costs.

摘要

背景

基于德国和英国的早期经验,我们为精神病谱系患者开发了一种强化的多模式团体方案(FACT Plus)。通过将其与常规的灵活主张社区治疗(FACT)(常规护理)相结合,我们旨在减少精神科住院和精神保健费用。

方法

我们纳入了成年精神病谱系障碍患者(>18 岁),他们在纳入前的 2 年内至少有过一次精神科住院。FACT Plus 每周进行一次,共 9 个月。干预组在荷兰北部的鹿特丹招募,对照组在鹿特丹南部招募。主要结局指标是住院时间(LOS),次要结局指标是精神保健费用和强制入院。

结果

我们纳入了干预组的 52 名患者和对照组的 61 名患者。在 12 个月的观察期内,每位患者的平均 LOS 为 15.2 天(干预组)和 34.6 天(对照组)。这代表了 19.4 天(56.1%)的差异。在对两组间基线差异进行校正的回归模型中,这一结果具有统计学意义(B=-.859,SE=.497,p=.042)。每位患者的平均总精神保健费用在干预组为 21098 欧元),对照组为 25054 欧元,差异约为 4000 欧元(16%)。此外,干预组无强制入院,对照组有 9 例。

结论

在常规 FACT 中加入 FACT Plus 后,干预组的精神病 LOS 明显低于对照组。这一结果伴随着精神保健费用的有限减少。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0c1d/6683433/2907ca5c2823/12888_2019_2229_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0c1d/6683433/2907ca5c2823/12888_2019_2229_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0c1d/6683433/2907ca5c2823/12888_2019_2229_Fig1_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
An intensive multimodal group programme for patients with psychotic disorders at risk of rehospitalization: a controlled intervention study.针对有再住院风险的精神病患者的强化多模式团体方案:一项对照干预研究。
BMC Psychiatry. 2019 Aug 5;19(1):241. doi: 10.1186/s12888-019-2229-x.
2
Effect of joint crisis plans on use of compulsory treatment in psychiatry: single blind randomised controlled trial.联合危机计划对精神科强制治疗使用情况的影响:单盲随机对照试验
BMJ. 2004 Jul 17;329(7458):136. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38155.585046.63. Epub 2004 Jul 7.
3
Clinical and cost-effectiveness of an intervention for reducing cholesterol and cardiovascular risk for people with severe mental illness in English primary care: a cluster randomised controlled trial.英国初级保健中针对严重精神疾病患者降低胆固醇和心血管疾病风险干预措施的临床效果及成本效益:一项整群随机对照试验
Lancet Psychiatry. 2018 Feb;5(2):145-154. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(18)30007-5. Epub 2018 Jan 22.
4
Systematic reviews of the effectiveness of day care for people with severe mental disorders: (1) acute day hospital versus admission; (2) vocational rehabilitation; (3) day hospital versus outpatient care.针对重度精神障碍患者日间护理效果的系统评价:(1)急性日间医院与住院治疗对比;(2)职业康复;(3)日间医院与门诊护理对比。
Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(21):1-75. doi: 10.3310/hta5210.
5
Assessing the efficacy of a modified assertive community-based treatment programme in a developing country.评估在发展中国家实施改良的基于社区的坚定治疗方案的疗效。
BMC Psychiatry. 2010 Sep 15;10:73. doi: 10.1186/1471-244X-10-73.
6
Crucial factors preceding compulsory psychiatric admission: a qualitative patient-record study.强制精神科入院前的关键因素:一项定性的病历研究。
BMC Psychiatry. 2017 Oct 24;17(1):350. doi: 10.1186/s12888-017-1512-y.
7
Health care utilization and cost after discharge from a mental health hospital; an RCT comparing community residential aftercare and treatment as usual.精神卫生医院出院后的医疗利用和费用;一项比较社区住宅康复治疗和常规治疗的 RCT 研究。
BMC Psychiatry. 2018 Nov 12;18(1):363. doi: 10.1186/s12888-018-1941-2.
8
Assertive community treatment for elderly people with severe mental illness.积极社区治疗严重精神疾病老年患者。
BMC Psychiatry. 2010 Oct 19;10:84. doi: 10.1186/1471-244X-10-84.
9
A Randomized Controlled Trial of the Rochester Forensic Assertive Community Treatment Model.罗彻斯特法医坚定社区治疗模式的随机对照试验。
Psychiatr Serv. 2017 Oct 1;68(10):1016-1024. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201600329. Epub 2017 Jun 1.
10
Community treatment orders for patients with psychosis (OCTET): a randomised controlled trial.社区治疗令对精神病患者的影响(OCTET):一项随机对照试验。
Lancet. 2013 May 11;381(9878):1627-33. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60107-5. Epub 2013 Mar 26.

本文引用的文献

1
Crucial factors preceding compulsory psychiatric admission: a qualitative patient-record study.强制精神科入院前的关键因素:一项定性的病历研究。
BMC Psychiatry. 2017 Oct 24;17(1):350. doi: 10.1186/s12888-017-1512-y.
2
Intensive case management for severe mental illness.严重精神疾病的强化个案管理。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jan 6;1(1):CD007906. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007906.pub3.
3
Interventions to Reduce Compulsory Psychiatric Admissions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.干预措施减少强制性精神科住院:系统评价和荟萃分析。
JAMA Psychiatry. 2016 Jul 1;73(7):657-64. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2016.0501.
4
The Revolving Door Phenomenon in an Italian Acute Psychiatric Ward: A 5-Year Retrospective Analysis of the Potential Risk Factors.意大利一家急性精神科病房的“旋转门”现象:对潜在风险因素的5年回顾性分析
J Nerv Ment Dis. 2016 Sep;204(9):686-92. doi: 10.1097/NMD.0000000000000540.
5
Maintaining Adherence Programme: evaluation of an innovative service model.维持依从性计划:一种创新服务模式的评估
BJPsych Bull. 2016 Feb;40(1):5-11. doi: 10.1192/pb.bp.114.048496.
6
Psychoeducation Improves Compliance and Outcome in Schizophrenia Without an Increase of Adverse Side Effects: A 7-Year Follow-up of the Munich PIP-Study.心理教育可提高精神分裂症患者的依从性和治疗效果且不增加不良反应:慕尼黑PIP研究的7年随访
Schizophr Bull. 2016 Jul;42 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S62-70. doi: 10.1093/schbul/sbw008. Epub 2016 Mar 8.
7
Outcomes of FLEXIBLE Assertive Community Treatment (FACT) Implementation: A Prospective Real Life Study.灵活主动社区治疗(FACT)实施的结果:一项前瞻性现实生活研究。
Community Ment Health J. 2016 Nov;52(8):898-907. doi: 10.1007/s10597-015-9831-2. Epub 2015 Feb 4.
8
Rehospitalization risk of former voluntary and involuntary patients with schizophrenia.精神分裂症患者的再住院风险:自愿与非自愿患者的比较。
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2014 Nov;49(11):1719-27. doi: 10.1007/s00127-014-0892-2. Epub 2014 May 8.
9
[Consensus regarding the definition of persons with severe mental illness and the number of such persons in the Netherlands].[关于荷兰严重精神疾病患者的定义及此类患者数量的共识]
Tijdschr Psychiatr. 2013;55(6):427-38.
10
The revolving door phenomenon in psychiatry: comparing low-frequency and high-frequency users of psychiatric inpatient services in a developing country.精神科的旋转门现象:比较发展中国家精神科住院服务的低频率和高频率使用者。
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2010 Apr;45(4):461-8. doi: 10.1007/s00127-009-0085-6. Epub 2009 Jun 18.