• 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

相似文献

1
2
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
3
4
Evaluating mental health decision units in acute care pathways (DECISION): a quasi-experimental, qualitative and health economic evaluation.评估急性护理路径中的心理健康决策单元(DECISION):一项准实验性、定性和健康经济评估。
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2023 Dec;11(25):1-221. doi: 10.3310/PBSM2274.
5
6
The use of locum doctors in the NHS: understanding and improving the quality and safety of care.NHS 中聘用临时医生的情况:了解并提高护理质量和安全性。
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2024 Sep;12(37):1-266. doi: 10.3310/CXMK4017.
7
8
Rapid evaluation of the Special Measures for Quality and challenged provider regimes: a mixed-methods study.快速评估质量特别措施和有问题的供应商制度:一项混合方法研究。
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2023 Oct;11(19):1-139. doi: 10.3310/GQQV3512.
9
A rapid mixed-methods evaluation of remote home monitoring models during the COVID-19 pandemic in England.英格兰 COVID-19 大流行期间远程家庭监护模式的快速混合方法评估。
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2023 Jul;11(13):1-151. doi: 10.3310/FVQW4410.
10
Impact of a social prescribing intervention in North East England on adults with type 2 diabetes: the SPRING_NE multimethod study.英格兰东北部社会处方干预对 2 型糖尿病成人的影响:SPRING_NE 多方法研究。
Public Health Res (Southampt). 2023 Mar;11(2):1-185. doi: 10.3310/AQXC8219.

DOI:10.3310/hsdr08090
PMID:32119232
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Community treatment orders are widely used in England. It is unclear whether their use varies between patients, places and services, or if they are associated with better patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To examine variation in the use of community treatment orders and their associations with patient outcomes and health-care costs.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis using multilevel statistical modelling.

SETTING

England, including 61 NHS mental health provider trusts.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 69,832 patients eligible to be subject to a community treatment order.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Use of community treatment orders and time subject to community treatment order; re-admission and total time in hospital after the start of a community treatment order; and mortality.

DATA SOURCES

The primary data source was the Mental Health Services Data Set. Mental Health Services Data Set data were linked to mortality records and local area deprivation statistics for England.

RESULTS

There was significant variation in community treatment order use between patients, provider trusts and local areas. Most variation arose from substantially different practice in a small number of providers. Community treatment order patients were more likely to be in the ‘severe psychotic’ care cluster grouping, male or black. There was also significant variation between service providers and local areas in the time patients remained on community treatment orders. Although slightly more community treatment order patients were re-admitted than non-community treatment order patients during the study period (36.9% vs. 35.6%), there was no significant difference in time to first re-admission (around 32 months on average for both). There was some evidence that the rate of re-admission differed between community treatment order and non-community treatment order patients according to care cluster grouping. Community treatment order patients spent 7.5 days longer, on average, in admission than non-community treatment order patients over the study period. This difference remained when other patient and local area characteristics were taken into account. There was no evidence of significant variation between service providers in the effect of community treatment order on total time in admission. Community treatment order patients were less likely to die than non-community treatment order patients, after taking account of other patient and local area characteristics (odds ratio 0.69, 95% credible interval 0.60 to 0.81).

LIMITATIONS

Confounding by indication and potential bias arising from missing data within the Mental Health Services Data Set. Data quality issues precluded inclusion of patients who were subject to community treatment orders more than once.

CONCLUSIONS

Community treatment order use varied between patients, provider trusts and local areas. Community treatment order use was not associated with shorter time to re-admission or reduced time in hospital to a statistically significant degree. We found no evidence that the effectiveness of community treatment orders varied to a significant degree between provider trusts, nor that community treatment orders were associated with reduced mental health treatment costs. Our findings support the view that community treatment orders in England are not effective in reducing future admissions or time spent in hospital. We provide preliminary evidence of an association between community treatment order use and reduced rate of death.

FUTURE WORK

These findings need to be replicated among patients who are subject to community treatment order more than once. The association between community treatment order use and reduced mortality requires further investigation.

STUDY REGISTRATION

The study was approved by the University of Warwick’s Biomedical and Scientific Research Ethics Committee (REGO-2015-1623).

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in ; Vol. 8, No. 9. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

摘要