Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T03:22:21.105Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Patients’ subjective initial response and the outcome of inpatient and day hospital treatment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 April 2020

S. Priebe*
Affiliation:
Unit for Social and Community Psychiatry, Queen Mary University of London, Academic Unit, Cherry Tree Lane, Glen Road, Plaistow, E13 8SP, United Kingdom
K. Barnicot
Affiliation:
Unit for Social and Community Psychiatry, Queen Mary University of London, Academic Unit, Cherry Tree Lane, Glen Road, Plaistow, E13 8SP, United Kingdom
R. McCabe
Affiliation:
Unit for Social and Community Psychiatry, Queen Mary University of London, Academic Unit, Cherry Tree Lane, Glen Road, Plaistow, E13 8SP, United Kingdom
A. Kiejna
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, Wroclaw Medical University, L. Pasteura str. 10, 50-367Wroclaw, Poland
P. Nawka
Affiliation:
Psychiatric Outpatient Clinic, Hopfgartenstr,16, D-01307Dresden, Germany
J. Raboch
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, Charles University in Prague, 1st Faculty of Medicine and General Teaching Hospital, Ke Karlovu 11, 12000 Praha 2, Czech Republic
M. Schützwohl
Affiliation:
Technische Universität Dresden, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Fetscherstraβe 74, 01307Dresden, Germany
T. Kallert
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Park Hospital Leipzig, Morawitzstraβe 2, 04289Leipzig, Germany
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 20 7540 6755; fax: +44 20 7540 2976. E-mail address: [email protected] (S. Priebe).
Get access

Abstract

Objective

This study aimed to establish whether psychiatric patients’ subjective initial response (SIR) to hospital and day hospital treatment predicts outcomes over a one-year follow-up period.

Method

We analysed data from 765 patients who were randomised to acute psychiatric treatment in a hospital or day hospital. SIR was assessed on day 3 after admission. Outcomes were psychiatric symptom levels and social disability at discharge, and at 3 and 12 months after discharge.

Results

After controlling for socio-demographic and clinical characteristics, a more positive SIR was significantly associated with lower symptom levels at discharge and 3 months after discharge and lower social disability at 3 months and 12 months after discharge.

Conclusion

SIR can predict outcomes of complex interventions over a one-year period. Patients’ initial views of acute hospital and day treatment should be elicited and considered as important.

Type
Original article
Copyright
Copyright © European Psychiatric Association 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Awad, A.G.Hogan, T.P.Voruganti, L.N.Heslegrave, R.J.Patients’ subjective experiences on antipsychotic medications: implications for outcome and quality of life. Int Clin Psychopharmacol 1995; 10(Suppl. 3):123132Google ScholarPubMed
Bartkó, G.Herzog, I.Békésy, M.Predicting outcome of neuroleptic treatment on the basis of subjective response and early clinical improvement. J Clin Psychiatry 1987; 48: 363365Google ScholarPubMed
Bröker, M.Röhricht, F.Priebe, S.Initial assessment of hospital treatment by patients with paranoid schizophrenia: a predictor of outcome. Psychiatr Res 1995; 58: 7781CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eichler, T.Schützwohl, M.Priebe, S.Wright, D.Adamowski, T.Rymaszewska, J.et al.Losses to follow-up in longitudinal psychiatric research. Epidemiol Psichiatr Soc 2008; 17: 138147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fakhoury, W.Kaiser, W.Röder-Wanner, U.Priebe, S.Subjective evaluation: is there more than one criterion? Schizophr Bull 2002; 28: 319327CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hansson, L.Björkman, T.Priebe, S.Are important patient-rated outcomes in community mental health care explained by only one factor? Acta Psychiatr Scand 2007; 116: 113118CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hansson, L.Svensson, T.Björkman, T.Bullenkamp, J.Lauber, C.Martinez-Leal, R.et al.What works for whom in a computer-mediated communication intervention in psychiatry? Moderators of outcome in a cluster randomised controlled trial. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2008; 118: 404409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofer, A.Rettenbecher, M.A.Edlinger, M.Kemmler, G.Widschwenter, C.G.Fleischaker, W.W.Subjective response and attitudes towards antipsychotic drug therapy during the initial treatment period: a prospective follow-up study in patients with schizophrenia. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2007; 116: 354366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jonsdottor, H.Friis, S.Horne, R.Pettersen, K.I.Andreassen, O.A.Beliefs about medications: measurement and relationship to adherence in patients with severe mental disorders. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2009; 119: 7478Google Scholar
Kallert, T.W.Schützwohl, M.Matthes, C.EDEN-Study Group The Client Socio-demographic and Clinical History Inventory. Dresden, Germany: Dresden University of Technology. Faculty of Medicine 2000Google Scholar
Kallert, T.Priebe, S.McCabe, R.Kienja, A.Rymaszewska, J.Nawka, P.et al.Are day hospitals effective for acutely ill psychiatric patients? A European multicentre randomised controlled trial. J Clin Psychiatry 2007; 68: 278287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Priebe, S.Early subjective reactions predicting the outcome of hospital treatment in depressive patients. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1987; 76: 134138CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Priebe, S.Social outcomes in schizophrenia. Br J Psychiatry 2007; 191(Suppl. 50): s15s20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Priebe, S.Bröker, M.Prediction of hospitalisations by schizophrenia patients’ assessment of treatment: an expanded study. J Psychiatr Res 1999; 33: 113119CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Priebe, S.Gruyters, T.Patients’ and caregivers’ initial assessments of day hospital treatment and course of symptoms. Compr Psychiatry 1994; 35: 234238CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Priebe, S.Gruyters, T.The importance of the first three days: predictors of treatment outcome in depressed inpatients. Br J Clin Psychol 1995; 34: 229236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Priebe, S.Gruyters, T.A pilot trial of treatment changes according to schizophrenic patients’ wishes. J Nerv Ment Dis 187 1999 441CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Priebe, S.Gruyters, T.Heinze, M.Hoffmann, C.Jäkel, A.Subjective criteria for evaluation of psychiatric care: methods for assessment in research and routine care. Psychiatr Praxis 1995; 22: 140144Google Scholar
Priebe, S.Kaiser, W.Huxley, P.Röder-Wanner, U.Rudolf, H.Do different subjective evaluation criteria reflect distinct constructs? J Nerv Ment Dis 1998; 186: 385392CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Priebe, S.Watzke, S.Hannsson, L.Burns, T.Objective social outcomes index (SIX): a method to summarise objective indicators of social outcomes in mental health care. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2008; 118: 5763CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Priebe, S.Katsakou, C.Amos, T.Leese, M.Morriss, R.Rose, D.et al.Patients’ views and readmissions one year after involuntary hospitalisation. Br J Psychiatry 2009; 194: 4954CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAS Version 9.1. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC, USA, 2005.Google Scholar
Schützwohl, M.Jarosz-Nowak, J.Briscoe, J.Szajowski, K.Kallert, T.W.Inter-rater reliability of the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS 4.0) and the Groningen Social Disabilities Schedule (GSDS-II) in a European multi-site randomised controlled trial on the effectiveness of psychiatric day hospitals. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res 2003; 12: 197207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Putten, T.May, R.Subjective response as a predictor of outcome in pharmacotherapy: the consumer has a point. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1978; 35: 477480CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Putten, T.May, R.Mander, S.R.Wittman, L.A.Subjective response to antipsychotic drugs. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1981; 38: 187190CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Putten, T.May, R.Mander, S.R.Response to antipsychotic medication: the doctor's and the consumer's view. Am J Psychiatry 1984; 141: 1619Google ScholarPubMed
Ventura, J.Lukoff, D.Nuechterlein, K.H.Liberman, R.P.Green, M.F.Shaner, A.Manual for the expanded brief psychiatric rating scale. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res 1993; 3: 227243Google Scholar
Wiersma, D.De Jong, A.Kraaijkamp, H.J.M.Ormel, J.GSDS II: The Groningen Social Disabilities Schedule, second version: manual, questionnaire, and rating form. Groningen: University of Groningen, Department of Social Psychiatry: 1990Google Scholar
World Health Organization, International statistical classification of disease and related health problems. Tenth Revision2005 GenevaGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.