Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17054133›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2006

Crisis intervention for people with severe mental illnesses.

C B Joy, C E Adams, K Rice

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Crisis intervention for people with severe mental illnesses.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  2. S3 guideline on psychosocial therapies in severe mental illness: evidence and recommendations.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2015
    Guideline
  3. Crisis intervention for people with severe mental illnesses.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  4. Day hospital versus admission for acute psychiatric disorders.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2011
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Economic evaluation of intensive home treatment in comparison to care as usual alongside a randomised controlled trial.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2025
    Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Lessons learned in developing community mental health care in Europe.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2011
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

C B JoyCochrane Schizophrenia Group, 15 Hyde Terrace, Leeds University, Leeds, UK. claireirving@btopenworld.com
C E Adams
K Rice
University of Nottingham · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA particularly difficult challenge for community treatment of people with serious mental illnesses is the delivery of an acceptable level of care during the acute phases of severe mental illness. Crisis intervention models of care were developed as a possible solution.

objectivesOur objectives are to review the effects of a crisis intervention model for anyone with serious mental illness experiencing an acute episode, compared with 'standard care'. SEARCH STRATEGY: We updated the 1998 and 2003 searches with a search of the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register of trials (January 2006). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials of crisis intervention models versus standard care for people with severe mental illnesses. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Working independently, we selected and critically appraised studies, extracted data and analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. Where possible and appropriate we calculated relative risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI), with the number needed to treat (NNT). We calculated Weighted Mean Differences (WMD) for continuous data. MAIN

resultsSeveral home-care studies have been carried out recently but none of these met the inclusion criteria for this review. For the 2006 update we excluded four more studies (total excluded 25). Two other recent studies await assessment; we found no new studies to add to the five studies already included in this review. None of these included studies purely investigated crisis intervention; all used a form of home care for acutely ill people, which included elements of crisis intervention. Forty five percent of the crisis/home care group were unable to avoid hospital admission during their treatment period. Home care, however, may help avoid repeat admissions (n=465, 3 RCTs, RR 0.72 CI 0.54 to 0.92, NNT 11 CI 6 to 97), but these data are heterogeneous (I-squared 86%). Crisis/home care reduces the number of people leaving the study early (n=594, 4 RCTs, RR lost at 12 months 0.74 CI 0.56 to 0.98, NNT 13 CI 7 to 130), reduces family burden (n=120, 1 RCT, RR 0.34 CI 0.20 to 0.59, NNT 3 CI 2 to 4), and is a more satisfactory form of care for both patients and families. We found no differences in death or mental state outcomes. All studies found home care to be more cost effective than hospital care but all numerical data were either skewed or unusable. No data on staff satisfaction, carer input, compliance with medication or number of relapses were available. AUTHORS'

conclusionsHome care crisis treatment, coupled with an ongoing home care package, is a viable and acceptable way of treating people with serious mental illnesses. If this approach is to be widely implemented it would seem that more evaluative studies are still needed.

Indexed as

Crisis InterventionHumansMental DisordersRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID17054133
OpenAlexW4230454977

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.