Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33947362›Full record

ArticleBMC psychiatry2021

Fidelity to an evidence-based model for crisis resolution teams: a cross-sectional multicentre study in Norway.

N Hasselberg, K H Holgersen, G M Uverud, J Siqveland, B Lloyd-Evans, S Johnson, T Ruud

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychiatry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Acute psychiatric care: approaches to increasing the range of services and improving access and quality of care.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2022
    Article
  8. Acute psychiatric care: the need for contextual understanding and tailored solutions.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2022
    Article
  9. Continuity of care and therapeutic relationships as critical elements in acute psychiatric care.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

N HasselbergDivision of Mental Health Services, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway.
K H HolgersenTiller Community Mental Health Centre, Department of Mental Health, St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim, Norway.
G M UverudUniversity of South-Eastern Norway, Vestfold, Norway.
J SiqvelandDivision of Mental Health Services, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway.
B Lloyd-EvansDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
S JohnsonDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
T RuudDivision of Mental Health Services, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway. torleif.ruud@medisin.uio.no.
Akershus University Hospital · NOUniversity College London · GBSt Olav's University Hospital · NOUniversity of Oslo · NOUniversity of South-Eastern Norway · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCrisis resolution teams (CRTs) are specialized multidisciplinary teams intended to provide assessment and short-term outpatient or home treatment as an alternative to hospital admission for people experiencing a mental health crisis. In Norway, CRTs have been established within mental health services throughout the country, but their fidelity to an evidence-based model for CRTs has been unknown.

methodsWe assessed fidelity to the evidence-based CRT model for 28 CRTs, using the CORE Crisis Resolution Team Fidelity Scale Version 2, a tool developed and first applied in the UK to measure adherence to a model of optimal CRT practice. The assessments were completed by evaluation teams based on written information, interviews, and review of patient records during a one-day visit with each CRT.

resultsThe fidelity scale was applicable for assessing fidelity of Norwegian CRTs to the CRT model. On a scale 1 to 5, the mean fidelity score was low (2.75) and with a moderate variation of fidelity across the teams. The CRTs had highest scores on the content and delivery of care subscale, and lowest on the location and timing of care subscale. Scores were high on items measuring comprehensive assessment, psychological interventions, visit length, service users' choice of location, and of type of support. However, scores were low on opening hours, gatekeeping acute psychiatric beds, facilitating early hospital discharge, intensity of contact, providing medication, and providing practical support.

conclusionsThe CORE CRT Fidelity Scale was applicable and relevant to assessment of Norwegian CRTs and may be used to guide further development in clinical practice and research. Lower fidelity and differences in fidelity patterns compared to the UK teams may indicate that Norwegian teams are more focused on early interventions to a broader patient group and less on avoiding acute inpatient admissions for patients with severe mental illness.

Indexed as

Mental DisordersMental Health ServicesCrisis InterventionCross-Sectional StudiesHumansNorwayAcuteCrisis resolution teamsEmergencyFidelity scaleImplementation

Identifiers

PMID33947362
PMCPMC8094557
OpenAlexW3157328025

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.