Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32410668›Full record

Trial reportBMC psychiatry2020

Improved patient-reported outcomes after interprofessional training in mental health: a nonrandomized intervention study.

Michael Marcussen, Birgitte Nørgaard, Karen Borgnakke, Sidse Arnfred

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC psychiatry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03070977 (Interprofessional Training in a Psychiatric Study Unit), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

NCT03070977 nacompletednot on this map

Interprofessional Training in a Psychiatric Study Unit

TypeinterventionalSponsorPsychiatric Research Unit, Region Zealand, DenmarkRan2016 to 2018Enrolled430ConditionsInterdisciplinary CommunicationArmsInterprofessional clinical training unit
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Michael MarcussenDepartment of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen and Psychiatry Slagelse, Region Zealand Mental Health Service, Fælledvej 6, 4200, Slagelse, Denmark. mhmc@regionsjaelland.dk.ORCID 0000-0001-8376-912X
Birgitte NørgaardDepartment of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Karen BorgnakkeDepartment of Media, Cognition and Communication, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Sidse ArnfredDepartment of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen and Psychiatry Slagelse, Region Zealand Mental Health Service, Fælledvej 6, 4200, Slagelse, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCollaborative interprofessional practices are essential in caring for people with complex mental health problems. Despite the difficulties of demonstrating positive impacts of interprofessional education (IPE), it is believed to enhance interprofessional practices. We aimed to assess impacts on patient satisfaction, self-reported psychological distress and mental health status in a psychiatric ward.

methodsWe conducted a nonrandomized intervention study with patient satisfaction, psychological distress, and health status as outcomes. Mental health inpatients were referred to either an interprofessional training unit (intervention group) or to a conventionally organized ward (comparison group). Outcomes were assessed using the Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10), and the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ-8).

resultsThe intervention group included 129 patients, the comparison group 123. The former group reported better mental health status than the latter; the postintervention mean difference between them being 5.30 (95% CI 2.71-7.89; p = 0.001; SF-36), with an effect size of 0.24. The intervention group patients also scored higher on satisfaction (mean difference 1.01; 95% CI 0.06-1.96; p = 0.04), with an effect size of 0.31. The groups' mean scores of psychological distress were identical.

conclusionOur results support the hypothesized value of interprofessional training: intervention group patients reported higher scores regarding mental health status and satisfaction than did comparison group patients. As IPE interventions have rarely involved patients and fewer have taken place in practice settings, further research into both the processes and the long-term effects of IPE in mental healthcare is needed.

trial registrationThe study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03070977 on March 6, 2017.

Indexed as

Health StatusInterprofessional RelationsPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresAdultDelivery of Health CareFemaleHumansMaleMental DisordersMental HealthPatient Satisfaction*Inpatients*Interprofessional training*IPE*Mental health services*Patient-reported outcomes*PRO*Team-based care

Identifiers

PMID32410668
PMCPMC7227283

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.