The evaluation of IMR in crisis resolution home treatment, a mixed methods study protocol

Introduction In the past years, recovery has become a central concept in psychiatric treatment (Sowers et al. Acad Psychiatry 2016; 40 461-467). However, in acute mental health care the concept of recovery is lacking attention (Rabenschlag et al. Psychiatry Q 2014; 85 225-239; Jaeger et al. Nord J...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: S. Kieft, I. Schaap
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Cambridge University Press 2023-03-01
Series:European Psychiatry
Online Access:https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S092493382300305X/type/journal_article
_version_ 1827753392614670336
author S. Kieft
I. Schaap
author_facet S. Kieft
I. Schaap
author_sort S. Kieft
collection DOAJ
description Introduction In the past years, recovery has become a central concept in psychiatric treatment (Sowers et al. Acad Psychiatry 2016; 40 461-467). However, in acute mental health care the concept of recovery is lacking attention (Rabenschlag et al. Psychiatry Q 2014; 85 225-239; Jaeger et al. Nord J Psychiatry 2015; 69 188-195; Luigi et al. Can. Med. Educ. J. 2010; 11 62-73). In 2021 a short version of Illness Management and Recovery (IMR) was implemented at the Psychiatric Emergency Service Amsterdam-Amstelland (SPAA). IMR is an evidence based group intervention for patients with severe mental illness, based on cognitive-behavioral, psychoeducational and motivational components. The aim of IMR is to support participants to manage their mental illness (Mueser et al. Schizophr Bull 2006; 32 32-43). To our knowledge this the first time that IMR is implemented within an acute mental health care setting Therefore the effects of IMR program on recovery in the acute phase of psychiatric illness are unknown. Objectives Insight in effects of IMR in acute mental health care. Methods We will carry out a mixed method study. In phase 1 the intervention will be carried out. 25 patients who are admitted to acute mental health care and diagnosed with a severe mental illness (SMI) will take part in the shortened version of IMR. Effects will be measured by the client version of the IMR-scale (Salyers et al. Community Ment. Health J. 2007; 43 459-480).Phase 2 includes qualitative interviews with a subsample from phase 1 (using maximum variety in diagnosis and demographic characteristics) to gain insight in the mechanisms and impact of the program. Results The proposed study will investigate the effects of an adjusted evidenced-based treatment within a population of people who receive treatment in a Psychiatric Emergency Service. The original intervention is shortened in time and topics, to match the needs of people in the acute phase of psychiatric illness. The question that arises is if an existing treatment can be translated to a different group of patients. Conclusions The proposed project has some important limitations that we feel deserve mentioning. It is questionable if a person can profit from a recovery program during a phase of acute crisis. Also, can we expect the same effects if the new program is a shortened version of the original evidence based intervention? Disclosure of InterestNone Declared
first_indexed 2024-03-11T07:35:33Z
format Article
id doaj.art-10743d2a9b6f4770b8d08f602b7bffdd
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 0924-9338
1778-3585
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-11T07:35:33Z
publishDate 2023-03-01
publisher Cambridge University Press
record_format Article
series European Psychiatry
spelling doaj.art-10743d2a9b6f4770b8d08f602b7bffdd2023-11-17T05:09:49ZengCambridge University PressEuropean Psychiatry0924-93381778-35852023-03-0166S111S11110.1192/j.eurpsy.2023.305The evaluation of IMR in crisis resolution home treatment, a mixed methods study protocolS. Kieft0I. Schaap1Emergency psychiatry, GGZ inGeest, Amsterdam, NetherlandsEmergency psychiatry, GGZ inGeest, Amsterdam, Netherlands Introduction In the past years, recovery has become a central concept in psychiatric treatment (Sowers et al. Acad Psychiatry 2016; 40 461-467). However, in acute mental health care the concept of recovery is lacking attention (Rabenschlag et al. Psychiatry Q 2014; 85 225-239; Jaeger et al. Nord J Psychiatry 2015; 69 188-195; Luigi et al. Can. Med. Educ. J. 2010; 11 62-73). In 2021 a short version of Illness Management and Recovery (IMR) was implemented at the Psychiatric Emergency Service Amsterdam-Amstelland (SPAA). IMR is an evidence based group intervention for patients with severe mental illness, based on cognitive-behavioral, psychoeducational and motivational components. The aim of IMR is to support participants to manage their mental illness (Mueser et al. Schizophr Bull 2006; 32 32-43). To our knowledge this the first time that IMR is implemented within an acute mental health care setting Therefore the effects of IMR program on recovery in the acute phase of psychiatric illness are unknown. Objectives Insight in effects of IMR in acute mental health care. Methods We will carry out a mixed method study. In phase 1 the intervention will be carried out. 25 patients who are admitted to acute mental health care and diagnosed with a severe mental illness (SMI) will take part in the shortened version of IMR. Effects will be measured by the client version of the IMR-scale (Salyers et al. Community Ment. Health J. 2007; 43 459-480).Phase 2 includes qualitative interviews with a subsample from phase 1 (using maximum variety in diagnosis and demographic characteristics) to gain insight in the mechanisms and impact of the program. Results The proposed study will investigate the effects of an adjusted evidenced-based treatment within a population of people who receive treatment in a Psychiatric Emergency Service. The original intervention is shortened in time and topics, to match the needs of people in the acute phase of psychiatric illness. The question that arises is if an existing treatment can be translated to a different group of patients. Conclusions The proposed project has some important limitations that we feel deserve mentioning. It is questionable if a person can profit from a recovery program during a phase of acute crisis. Also, can we expect the same effects if the new program is a shortened version of the original evidence based intervention? Disclosure of InterestNone Declaredhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S092493382300305X/type/journal_article
spellingShingle S. Kieft
I. Schaap
The evaluation of IMR in crisis resolution home treatment, a mixed methods study protocol
European Psychiatry
title The evaluation of IMR in crisis resolution home treatment, a mixed methods study protocol
title_full The evaluation of IMR in crisis resolution home treatment, a mixed methods study protocol
title_fullStr The evaluation of IMR in crisis resolution home treatment, a mixed methods study protocol
title_full_unstemmed The evaluation of IMR in crisis resolution home treatment, a mixed methods study protocol
title_short The evaluation of IMR in crisis resolution home treatment, a mixed methods study protocol
title_sort evaluation of imr in crisis resolution home treatment a mixed methods study protocol
url https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S092493382300305X/type/journal_article
work_keys_str_mv AT skieft theevaluationofimrincrisisresolutionhometreatmentamixedmethodsstudyprotocol
AT ischaap theevaluationofimrincrisisresolutionhometreatmentamixedmethodsstudyprotocol
AT skieft evaluationofimrincrisisresolutionhometreatmentamixedmethodsstudyprotocol
AT ischaap evaluationofimrincrisisresolutionhometreatmentamixedmethodsstudyprotocol