scholarly journals The Blended Electronic Illness Management and Recovery Programme for People with Severe Mental Illness: A Qualitative Process Evaluation Alongside a Trial (Preprint)

10.2196/20860 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Titus, A. A. Beentjes ◽  
Betsie, G.I. van Gaal ◽  
Hester Vermeulen ◽  
Maria W. G. Nijhuis-van der Sanden ◽  
Peter, J.J. Goossesns
Keyword(s):  
Mental Illness ◽  
Severe Mental Illness ◽  
Process Evaluation ◽  
Illness Management ◽  
Illness Management And Recovery ◽  
Qualitative Process Evaluation

scholarly journals The blended electronic-Illness Management and Recovery program for people with severe mental illness: a qualitative process evaluation alongside a trial (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Titus, A. A. Beentjes ◽  
Betsie, G.I. van Gaal ◽  
Hester Vermeulen ◽  
Maria W. G. Nijhuis-van der Sanden ◽  
Peter, J.J. Goossesns
Keyword(s):  
Mental Illness ◽  
Severe Mental Illness ◽  
Process Evaluation ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Great Promise ◽  
Illness Management ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Illness Management And Recovery ◽  
It Resources

BACKGROUND Against the backdrop of the great promise of e-mental health, we tested the e- Illness Management and Recovery (IMR) intervention, which coincide the standard IMR programme content and methodology into face-to-face and Internet based strategies on the constructed e-IMR platform. The e-IMR platform was used too little to provide definite conclusions on the potential efficacy of e-health for people with severe mental illness (SMI). OBJECTIVE This study aims to identify if the added value of the e-IMR intervention and which barriers and facilitators can explain the low use of the e-IMR platform. METHODS This process evaluation was designed alongside a multi-centre cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT). Qualitative data were gathered at the endpoint in semi-structured interviews with trial participants and trainers. Baseline characteristics were used to compare the users and non-users. The study population comprised of participants and trainers from the intervention arm of the e-IMR RCT. RESULTS Out of 41 participants 14 used the e-IMR platform. Twenty-seven participants and eleven trainers were interviewed at the endpoint. e-IMR’s components that had added value were the persuasive nature of using goal-tracking sheets and monitoring and the peer-testimonials’ potential to enhance group discussions and participants’ disclosure. The low use of the e-IMR platform was influence by: the platform’s inflexibility, the lack of IT resources, the group context, the participants’ low computer skills and disabilities, and the trainers’ hesitant e-health attitude. CONCLUSIONS The extent of e-health readiness and correlations with vulnerabilities in persons with SMI need to be further investigated. this study shows that use of e-IMR components need flexible options, provided only in response to a participant’s need. Providing the e-IMR in the future is preconditioned by checking available IT resources, providing tablets to participants in group settings, providing computer/Internet guidance to participants before or parallel to the group sessions, checking the e-health attitude and skills of trainers, and providing necessary e-health training to increase the skills of future e-IMR trainers. CLINICALTRIAL https://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=4772 INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT RR2-10.1186/s12913-016-1267-z

scholarly journals Identifying the minimal important difference in patient-reported outcome measures in the field of people with severe mental illness: a pre–post-analysis of the Illness Management and Recovery Programme

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Titus A. A. Beentjes ◽  
Steven Teerenstra ◽  
Hester Vermeulen ◽  
Peter J. J. Goossens ◽  
Maria W. G. Nijhuis-van der Sanden ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Illness ◽  
Severe Mental Illness ◽  
Minimal Important Difference ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Self Management ◽  
Illness Management ◽  
Meaningful Change ◽  
Illness Management And Recovery ◽  
Patient Reported

Abstract Purpose Complementary interventions for persons with severe mental illness (SMI) focus on both personal recovery and illness self-management. This paper aimed to identify the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) associated with the most relevant and meaningful change in persons with SMI who attended the Illness Management and Recovery Programme (IMR). Methods The effect of the IMR was measured with PROMs concerning recovery, illness self-management, burden of symptoms and quality of life (QoL). From the QoL measures, an anchor was chosen based on the most statistically significant correlations with the PROMs. Then, we estimated the minimal important difference (MID) for all PROMs using an anchor-based method supported by distribution-based methods. The PROM with the highest outcome for effect score divided by MID (the effect/MID index) was considered to be a measure of the most relevant and meaningful change. Results All PROMs showed significant pre–post-effects. The QoL measure ‘General Health Perception (Rand-GHP)’ was identified as the anchor. Based on the anchor method, the Mental Health Recovery Measure (MHRM) showed the highest effect/MID index, which was supported by the distribution-based methods. Because of the modifying gender covariate, we stratified the MID calculations. In most MIDs, the MHRM showed the highest effect/MID indexes. Conclusion Taking into account the low sample size and the gender covariate, we conclude that the MHRM was capable of showing the most relevant and meaningful change as a result of the IMR in persons with SMI.

scholarly journals Integrating Assertive Community Treatment and Illness Management and Recovery for Consumers with Severe Mental Illness

2010 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 319-329 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle P. Salyers ◽  
Alan B. McGuire ◽  
Angela L. Rollins ◽  
Gary R. Bond ◽  
Kim T. Mueser ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Illness ◽  
Severe Mental Illness ◽  
Assertive Community Treatment ◽  
Community Treatment ◽  
Illness Management ◽  
Illness Management And Recovery

Implementing the Illness Management and Recovery Program for Consumers With Severe Mental Illness

2009 ◽  
Vol 60 (4) ◽  
pp. 483-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle P. Salyers ◽  
Jenna L. Godfrey ◽  
Alan B. McGuire ◽  
Tim Gearhart ◽  
Angela L. Rollins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Illness ◽  
Severe Mental Illness ◽  
Illness Management ◽  
Illness Management And Recovery ◽  
Recovery Program

Minimal Important Difference in Patient Reported Outcome Measures in Persons with Severe Mental Illness, a Post-hoc Pre-Post Analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Titus Beentjes ◽  
Steven Teerenstra ◽  
Hester Vermeulen ◽  
Maria W.G. Nijhuis-van der Sanden ◽  
Betsie G.I. van Gaal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Illness ◽  
Severe Mental Illness ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Outcome Measure ◽  
Minimal Important Difference ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Illness Management And Recovery ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Complementary Intervention

Abstract Background: Complementary interventions for persons with severe mental illness (SMI) provide broad strategies for recovery and illness self-management. It is not known which outcome measure can be considered to be relevant for persons with SMI. This knowledge can motivate a professional to offer and stimulate a person to participate in that intervention. This paper aimed to identify the outcome measures that determine the most relevant and meaningful change and capture the benefits of a complementary intervention. Methods: By using anchor-based and distribution-based methods, we estimated the minimal important difference (MID) to determine which outcome measure persons improved in beyond the MID to reflect a relevant change in pre-post effect of a complementary intervention, in casu the Illness Management and Recovery programme (IMR).Results: The anchor MID was based on the results of the measure Rand General Health Perception (Rand-GHP). On all MIDs, the Mental Health Recovery Measure (MHRM) had the highest score on the effect compared to its MIDs, and also on all MIDs the MHRM had the highest percentages of participants that scored above the MID. Conclusion: The Rand-GHP is considered to be an excellent measure for investigating the MID as a result of an intervention. The results of our study can be used in shared decision-making processes to determine which intervention is suitable for a person with SMI. A person who desires a recovery outcome, as measured by the MHRM, can be recommended to do the IMR programme.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document