scholarly journals Are factors associated with subjective quality of life in people with severe mental illness consistent over time? — A 6-year follow-up study

2006 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lars Hansson ◽  
Tommy Björkman
1999 ◽  
Vol 175 (5) ◽  
pp. 426-432 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Fahy ◽  
Andy Kent ◽  
Theresa Tattan ◽  
Elizabeth Van Horn ◽  
Ian White

BackgroundIt is not clear which model of case management is most likely to improve quality of life in people with severe mental illness.AimsTo use baseline data derived from the UK700 Case Management Trial to assess the relative importance of clinical, social and unmet needs variables as predictors of subjective quality of life in patients with severe mental illness.MethodPatients (n=708) were assessed on quality of life (Lancashire Quality of Life Profile), needs (Camber well Assessment of Need), psychopathology and social functioning. Variables that were amenable to change through case management were investigated as predictors of quality of life.ResultsSocial variables accounted for 7% of the variance for subjective quality of life, compared with 19% for clinical variables, and 20% for unmet needs. The strongest predictors of subjective quality of life were unmet basic, social and functioning needs, depression and positive psychotic symptoms.ConclusionsSubjective quality of life in severely mentally ill patients is predicted by clinical variables and unmet needs. The results identify priority areas for the attention of case managers who seek to improve quality of life in these patients.


2003 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 473-491 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey W. Swanson ◽  
Marvin S. Swartz ◽  
Eric B. Elbogen ◽  
H. Ryan Wagner ◽  
Barbara J. Burns

2016 ◽  
Vol 172 (1-3) ◽  
pp. 23-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erlend Strand Gardsjord ◽  
Kristin Lie Romm ◽  
Svein Friis ◽  
Helene Eidsmo Barder ◽  
Julie Evensen ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 214 (5) ◽  
pp. 260-268 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melanie Lean ◽  
Miriam Fornells-Ambrojo ◽  
Alyssa Milton ◽  
Brynmor Lloyd-Evans ◽  
Bronwyn Harrison-Stewart ◽  
...  

BackgroundSelf-management is intended to empower individuals in their recovery by providing the skills and confidence they need to take active steps in recognising and managing their own health problems. Evidence supports such interventions in a range of long-term physical health conditions, but a recent systematic synthesis is not available for people with severe mental health problems.AimsTo evaluate the effectiveness of self-management interventions for adults with severe mental illness (SMI).MethodA systematic review of randomised controlled trials was conducted. A meta-analysis of symptomatic, relapse, recovery, functioning and quality of life outcomes was conducted, using RevMan.ResultsA total of 37 trials were included with 5790 participants. From the meta-analysis, self-management interventions conferred benefits in terms of reducing symptoms and length of admission, and improving functioning and quality of life both at the end of treatment and at follow-up. Overall the effect size was small to medium. The evidence for self-management interventions on readmissions was mixed. However, self-management did have a significant effect compared with control on subjective measures of recovery such as hope and empowerment at follow-up, and self-rated recovery and self-efficacy at both time points.ConclusionThere is evidence that the provision of self-management interventions alongside standard care improves outcomes for people with SMI. Self-management interventions should form part of the standard package of care provided to people with SMI and should be prioritised in guidelines: research on best methods of implementing such interventions in routine practice is needed.Declaration of interestsNone.


2016 ◽  
Vol 26 (5) ◽  
pp. 1349-1360 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. R. S. Moura ◽  
C. G. A. Araújo ◽  
M. M. Prado ◽  
H. B. M. S. Paro ◽  
R. M. C. Pinto ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document