Does community care work? A model to evaluate the effectiveness of mental health services
2008

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Community Mental Health Services in Lombardy

Sample size: 4712 publication Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Emiliano Monzani, Arcadio Erlicher, Antonio Lora, Piergiorgio Lovaglio, Giorgio Vittadini

Primary Institution: Dipartimento di Salute Mentale dell'Azienda Ospedaliera 'G. Salvini'

Hypothesis

The study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of community Mental Health Departments in Lombardy and analyze differences in outcomes produced by different packages of care.

Conclusion

The study suggests that community Mental Health Departments in Lombardy positively affect patient outcomes, with some care packages being more effective than others.

Supporting Evidence

  • The study evaluated 4,712 patients treated in ten Mental Health Departments.
  • Patients were assessed at least twice in a year using the HoNOS scale.
  • Results showed a significant average reduction in HoNOS scores over time.

Takeaway

This study looked at how well mental health services in Lombardy help people feel better, finding that some types of care work better than others.

Methodology

The study used multilevel growth models to analyze changes in Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) scores over time for patients treated in various care packages.

Potential Biases

The selection process for including patients may introduce bias, as it was not based on random allocation.

Limitations

The study's results are preliminary due to a small sample size and the need for a different study design to follow patients over time.

Participant Demographics

{"gender":{"male":2073,"female":null},"age_groups":{"15-24":222,"25-34":992,"35-44":1127,"45-54":994,"55-64":805,"65+":562},"marital_status":{"single":2352,"married":1646,"divorced":413,"widowed":246},"education_level":{"primary":1533,"secondary":1918,"higher":1082},"employment":{"not_employed":896}}

Statistical Information

P-Value

<.0001

Statistical Significance

p<0.05

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1186/1752-4458-2-10

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication