Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33407731›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of mental health systems2021

The effects of intensive home treatment on self-efficacy in patients recovering from a psychiatric crisis.

Ansam Barakat, Matthijs Blankers, Jurgen E Cornelis, Nick M Lommerse, Aartjan T F Beekman, Jack J M Dekker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of mental health systems, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. A qualitative exploration of older people's experience of discharge from mental health inpatient settings.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2025
    Article
  4. Observational
  5. Study protocol of an observational study in acute psychiatric home treatment: How does home treatment work? Identification of common factors and predictors of treatment success.Neuropsychiatrie : Klinik, Diagnostik, Therapie und Rehabilitation : Organ der Gesellschaft Osterreichischer Nervenarzte und Psychiater · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

6 authors.

Ansam BarakatDepartment of Research, Arkin Mental Health Care, Klaprozenweg 111, 1033 NN, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. ansam.barakat@arkin.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5947-5110
Matthijs BlankersDepartment of Research, Arkin Mental Health Care, Klaprozenweg 111, 1033 NN, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jurgen E CornelisDepartment of Research, Arkin Mental Health Care, Klaprozenweg 111, 1033 NN, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Nick M LommerseDepartment of Research, Arkin Mental Health Care, Klaprozenweg 111, 1033 NN, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Aartjan T F BeekmanDepartment of Psychiatry Amsterdam UMC/VUmc, Amsterdam Public Health research institute Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jack J M DekkerDepartment of Research, Arkin Mental Health Care, Klaprozenweg 111, 1033 NN, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

Stichting tot Steun Vereniging tot Christelijke Verzorging van Geestes- en Zenuwzieken ST13112.MeS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study evaluated whether providing intensive home treatment (IHT) to patients experiencing a psychiatric crisis has more effect on self-efficacy when compared to care as usual (CAU). Self-efficacy is a psychological concept closely related to one of the aims of IHT. Additionally, differential effects on self-efficacy among patients with different mental disorders and associations between self-efficacy and symptomatic recovery or quality of life were examined.

methodsData stem from a Zelen double consent randomised controlled trial (RCT), which assesses the effects of IHT compared to CAU on patients who experienced a psychiatric crisis. Data were collected at baseline, 6 and 26 weeks follow-up. Self-efficacy was measured using the Mental Health Confidence Scale. The 5-dimensional EuroQol instrument and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) were used to measure quality of life and symptomatic recovery, respectively. We used linear mixed modelling to estimate the associations with self-efficacy.

resultsData of 142 participants were used. Overall, no difference between IHT and CAU was found with respect to self-efficacy (B = - 0.08, SE = 0.15, p = 0.57), and self-efficacy did not change over the period of 26 weeks (B = - 0.01, SE = 0.12, t (103.95) = - 0.06, p = 0.95). However, differential effects on self-efficacy over time were found for patients with different mental disorders (F(8, 219.33) = 3.75, p < 0.001). Additionally, self-efficacy was strongly associated with symptomatic recovery (total BPRS B = - 0.10, SE = 0.02, p < 0.00) and quality of life (B = 0.14, SE = 0.01, p < 0.001).

conclusionsAlthough self-efficacy was associated with symptomatic recovery and quality of life, IHT does not have a supplementary effect on self-efficacy when compared to CAU. This result raises the question whether, and how, crisis care could be adapted to enhance self-efficacy, keeping in mind the development of self-efficacy in depressive, bipolar, personality, and schizophrenia spectrum and other psychotic disorders. The findings should be considered with some caution. This study lacked sufficient power to test small changes in self-efficacy and some mental disorders had a small sample size. Trial registration This trial is registered at Trialregister.nl, number NL6020.

Indexed as

Emergency psychiatryIntensive home treatmentRandomised controlled trialSelf-efficacy

Identifiers

PMID33407731
PMCPMC7789166

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.