ArticleInternational journal of integrated care2021
A Qualitative Study on the Implementation of Flexible Assertive Community Treatment - an Integrated Community-based Treatment Model for Patients with Severe Mental Illness.
Article in International journal of integrated care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Results from a randomized controlled trial investigating effectiveness of a community-based intervention on empowerment of people with severe mental illness.Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology · 2025Trial
- Frontline staff experiences of bridging dual diagnosis treatments - Determinants for implementing a cross-sectoral collaboration model.Addiction science & clinical practice · 2026Article
- What is known about flexible assertive community treatment across populations and contexts? A scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2025Article
- SEED-AN and a non-specialised, severe mental illness (SMI) community treatment model: perspectives of professionals and patients of a QoL-focussed treatment.Journal of eating disorders · 2024Article
- Circadian Reinforcement Therapy in Combination With Electronic Self-Monitoring to Facilitate a Safe Postdischarge Period for Patients With Major Depression: Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR mental health · 2023Article
- Flexible Assertive Community Treatment in Rural and Remote Areas: A Qualitative Study of the Challenges and Adaptations of the Model.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- From Model to Everyday Practice: A Qualitative Observational Study of Daily Fact Team Board Meetings.International journal of integrated careArticle
- Building Care in the Heart of the Moment - Exploring the Process of Collaboration for the Making of Flexible Assertive Community Treatment.International journal of integrated careArticle
- The Integration of Flexible Assertive Community Treatment with District Social Support Service Teams for Patients with Severe Mental Illness in the Netherlands: A Qualitative Analysis of Team Members' Experiences.International journal of integrated careArticle
- Integration of Care in Complex and Fragmented Service Systems: Experiences of Staff in Flexible Assertive Community Treatment Teams.International journal of integrated careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFlexible Assertive Community Treatment (FACT) is a model of integrated care aiming to increase continuity of care for individuals with severe mental illness. FACT teams have been implemented in many countries by merging Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) and standard care from Community Mental Health teams (CMHTs). However, there has been little research on how practitioners experienced the fusion of these teams.
aimThis study explores how former ACT and CMHT practitioners perceived the implementation of FACT.
methodPerceptions of the FACT model, implementation strategies and adaptations of the model were investigated through 17 semi-structured interviews with FACT practitioners.
resultsPerceived positive contributions of FACT included the recognition that FACT addressed a service gap for a group of patients who could benefit from increased support and improved integration of outpatient and hospital care. Perceived disadvantages of FACT included the experience that FACT drew away resources from ACT patients with the highest psychiatric needs. The findings also describe barriers to implementation, such as lack of perceived benefit of FACT, the maintenance of traditional work culture and insufficient organisational capacity. These challenges required the negotiation of local implementation strategies and adaptations.
conclusionFACT increases access to intensive care for a broader group of patients with severe mental illness. However, findings from this study also suggest that the increased caseload in FACT compared with ACT and a changed mindset may not reflect the needs of the smaller group of patients who find it difficult to engage with mental health care services.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.