This article compares in a systematic way the team's intervention choices of professionals across seven European countries: France, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain towards problems and needs of patients with schizophrenia and relates this to the diversity of psychiatric systems.

The clinical and social status of 433 patients was assessed by means of the Schedules for Clinical Assessment in Neuropsychiatry (SCAN) and the Needs for Care Assessment instrument (NFCAS) which was used to determine teams' intervention choices toward the NFCAS problems.

There is no, or little, consensus across Europe on teams' intervention choices towards either the clinical or the social problems and needs of patients suffering from schizophrenic disorders. These comparisons outlined the cultural differences concerning the interventions that were proposed and should be taken into account when interpreting the number of needs and the need status since the need status relies heavily on the interventions proposed. The differences were not connected with the availability of resources; most of the comparisons show differences between centers as well as differences between groups of relatively similar resource countries.

The review aims to identify the extent and nature of research on mental disorders and their care in immigrant populations in three major European countries with high levels of immigration, i.e. Germany, Italy, United Kingdom (UK).

Peer-reviewed publications on the subject from the three countries between 1996 and 2004 were analyzed. The research questions addressed, the methods used, and the results obtained were assessed.

Thirteen papers reporting empirical studies were found from Germany, four from Italy and 95 from the UK. Studies addressed a range of research questions and most frequently assessed rates of service utilization in different immigrant groups. The most consistent finding is a higher rate of hospital admissions for Afro-Caribbean patients in the UK. Many studies had serious methodological shortcomings with low sample sizes and unspecified inclusion criteria.

Despite large scale immigration in each of the three studied countries, the numbers of relevant research publications vary greatly with a relatively high level of empirical research in the UK. Possible reasons for this are a generally stronger culture of mental health service research and a higher number of researchers who are themselves from immigrant backgrounds in the UK.

Overall the evidence base to guide the development of mental health services for immigrant populations appears limited. Future research requires appropriate funding, should be of sufficient methodological quality and may benefit from collaboration across Europe.

We assessed the quality of European treatment guidelines in the field of mental health that have been produced by national psychiatric associations. The main focus was the question of whether the development process of the guidelines followed basic principles of evidence-based medicine.

Sixty-one European clinical practice guidelines from 14 countries, published between 1998 and 2003, were assessed using the ‘Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) Instrument’. The domain score was calculated for each of the six domains of the AGREE instrument. The seven items of the domain “rigor of development” and one additional item concerning national particularities were assessed in detail.

The mean scores in the six domains were rather low, although the quality varied among the different guidelines. The highest mean score was obtained in the domain clarity and presentation (70.8% S.D. 23.5), the lowest on editorial independence (19.7% S.D. 29.3). The recommendations of about half of the assessed guidelines could be considered to be evidence-based.

The assessed guidelines showed a broad range of quality: some producers attached importance to an evidence-based development process; but in spite of this, a large number of guidelines were only of middling quality. As national particularities are only rarely mentioned and the development process of guidelines is complex, an international collaboration that aims toward the production of shareable guidelines might be promising.

This is a naturalistic study comparing the outcomes of all emergency psychiatric interventions in the Hospital Center of Luxemburg during two periods of six months each, before and after the introduction of a crisis intervention program. The aim of the study was to investigate the clinical and economic impact of crisis intervention on psychiatric emergency admissions.

All subjects admitted to the emergency psychiatric unit during the two study periods were considered for participation. Data were collected retrospectively and comparisons were made between patients before (September 1, 2001 to February 28, 2002) and after (September 1, 2002 to February 28, 2003) crisis intervention programs were established.

A comparison between the two patient groups demonstrated a significant decrease in the rate of voluntary hospitalizations after crisis intervention, and a significant increase in the number of patients with subsequent outpatient consultations. The cost increase due to ambulatory follow-ups was widely compensated for by the cost decrease due to hospitalization avoidance.

These preliminary findings suggest that crisis intervention leads to a shift from hospitalization to outpatient psychotherapeutic management in emergency psychiatric services, which has a significant economic impact.