A comparison of assertive community treatment and intensive case management for patients in rural areas

2002 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 207-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Schaedle ◽  
John H. McGrew ◽  
Gary R. Bond ◽  
Irwin Epstein

2007 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucinda Smith ◽  
Richard Newton

The purpose of the present paper was to review the current state of evidence for types of case management, focusing on the last 10 years since publication of the Cochrane Systematic Reviews of case management and assertive community treatment. A literature review of electronic databases from 1995 to the present to identify recent research on psychiatric case management, both original studies and reviews, was carried out. Original articles were organized on basis of year of study, experimental group and outcome variables to determine patterns. Sixty relevant papers were located. Thirty-nine are reports of experimental trials of types of case management and 21 are reviews or discussion papers. The focus of research is on assertive community treatment or intensive case management, with only five papers on other forms of less intense case management. Numerous outcomes have been examined, of those examined often enough to draw meaningful conclusions only one, engagement with services, has been consistently positive. All other outcomes have produced mixed results. The strength of findings in favour of case management has weakened over time. A heterogeneous group of experimental designs limits comparisons. Numerous issues with methodology and definitions of types of case management have beset research in this field. Assertive types of case management (including assertive community treatment and intensive case management) are more effective than standard case management in reducing total number of days spent in hospital, improving engagement, compliance, independent living and patient satisfaction. More important than the type of service configuration is to understand the clinical criteria of the services provided and their effectiveness.


2008 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 106-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Max Marshall

AbstractThe aims of the Editorial are to summarise what we know for certain from clinical trials of Intensive Case Management, and to highlight lessons for clinicians and researchers. I will upon two systematic reviews of trials of Intensive Case Management versus standard care or low intensity case management. Both incorporated a meta-regression which examined the effect of fidelity to the Assertive Community Treatment model on outcome. The effectiveness of Intensive Case Management was limited to improving patient satisfaction and reducing attrition. Intensive Case Management teams organised according to the Assertive Community Treatment model offered the additional benefit of reducing days in hospital, but only when the team's clients had been high users of hospital care over the previous 12 months. Four important lessons can be drawn: a) Changes to the process of care tend to affect process variables, not outcome variables. b) Complex interventions must be defined meticulously in clear terminology. c) Researchers must demonstrate that complex interventions have been properly implemented in clinical trials. d) It is important to remember that in a clinical trial a successful outcome is determined as much by the control group as by the intervention.


Psych ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 792-799
Author(s):  
Vaios Peritogiannis ◽  
Fotini Tsoli

The Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) model of care has been long considered to be effective in the management of patients with severe mental illness (SMI) in most Western countries. The implementation of the original ACT model may be particularly challenging in rural and remote communities with small and dispersed populations and lack of adequate mental health services. Rural programs may have to adapt the model and modify the ACT fidelity standards to accommodate these limitations, and this is the rationale for the introduction of more flexible, hybrid ACT models. In rural Greece, the so called Mobile Mental Health Units (MMHUs) are well-established community mental health services. For patients with SMI that have difficulties engaging with treatment services, the new hybrid ACT model has been recently launched. The objective of this manuscript is to present the recently launched hybrid ACT model in rural areas in Greece and to explore the challenges and limitations in its implementation from the experience of a team of mental health professionals with ACT experience. Referral criteria have not been strictly set, but the number of previous relapses and hospitalizations is taken under consideration, as well as the history of poor treatment adherence and disengagement from mental health services. The main limitation in the implementation of the hybrid ACT service is that it has been introduced in several areas in the absence of a pre-existing community mental health service. This may impact referrals and limit focus on the difficult cases of patients with SMI, thus making the evaluation of the model inapplicable.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document