Trial reportIrish journal of medical science2012
A randomized-controlled trial of intensive case management emphasizing the recovery model among patients with severe and enduring mental illness.
Trial report in Irish journal of medical science, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Implementation of outcome measurement (HoNOS) in an outpatient psychiatric clinic in Sligo/Leitrim mental health service.Irish journal of medical science · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is increasing interest in the application of recovery principles in mental health services.
aimsWe studied the implementation of a programme of intensive case management (ICM) emphasizing recovery principles in a community mental health service in Ireland.
methodsEighty service attenders with severe and enduring illness characterized by significant ongoing disability were randomized into (1) a group receiving a programme of ICM and (2) a group receiving treatment as usual (TAU). Groups were compared before and after the programme for general psychopathology using the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) (clinician rated) and How are You? scale (self-rated). The Functional Analysis of Care Environments (FACE) scale provided assessment of multiple functional domains.
resultsThe overall group (mean age 44.5 ± 13.2 years; 60% male) had mean total Health of the Nation Outcome Scale (HoNOS) scale scores of 10.5 ± 4.6, with problems in social functioning especially prominent (mean social subscale score 5.0 ± 2.7). The ICM group were younger (p < 0.01) with higher baseline scores on the HoNOS social subscale and BPRS (p < 0.05). An analysis of covariance, controlling for these baseline differences, indicated greater improvement in BPRS scores (p = 0.001), How are You? scores (p = 0.02) and FACE domains for cognition, symptoms and interpersonal relationships (all p < 0.001) in the ICM group. The ICM group underwent greater changes in structured daily activities that were linked to improved BPRS scores (p = 0.01).
conclusionsA programme of ICM emphasizing recovery principles resulted in significant improvement across psychopathological and functional domains. Improvements were linked to enhanced engagement with structured daily activities. Recovery-oriented practices can be integrated into existing mental health services and provided alongside traditional models of care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22218933What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.