行为健康危机应对模式在实现行为健康目标与促进刑事司法分流中的比较

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Matthew Bakko, Leonard Swanson, Catherine Zettner, Kaitlyn Kok, Hosanna Fukuzawa, Sheryl Kubiak
{"title":"行为健康危机应对模式在实现行为健康目标与促进刑事司法分流中的比较","authors":"Matthew Bakko, Leonard Swanson, Catherine Zettner, Kaitlyn Kok, Hosanna Fukuzawa, Sheryl Kubiak","doi":"10.1007/s10597-024-01447-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Various behavioral health crisis models have been developed to advance the shared goals of improving behavioral health outcomes and increasing diversion from criminal legal systems. The effectiveness of these models is promising, yet research is needed to understand their comparative advantages. This study compares the effectiveness of three community mental health response models-co-response, mobile response, and office-based response-and law enforcement-only response in addressing key behavioral health and diversion goals. These goals include improvements to follow-ups, service linkages to community resources, crisis de-escalation, and dispositions (i.e., decreasing hospitalizations and arrests). Five partner sites in Michigan provided administrative data on crisis cases and outcomes. The sample included crisis cases from one office-based model (n = 91), two mobile response models (n = 306), and two co-response models (n = 322), along with data from the partnering law enforcement agencies at each site (n = 669). Results show that model type is associated with all key outcomes. Mobile response effectively met all examined crisis response goals, including by resolving crises informally or without hospitalization, providing links to community services, and conducting follow-ups. Co-response showed some success in meeting goals, while the law enforcement-only model showed more limited results. Additionally, law enforcement presence during a mobile crisis response produced worse disposition outcomes, while contacting a CMH during law enforcement response produced better disposition outcomes. Overall, this study contributes to SAMHSA's (2020) crisis response vision to effectively meet the behavioral health needs of those in need of service by providing \"someone to respond.\"</p>","PeriodicalId":10654,"journal":{"name":"Community Mental Health Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparison of Behavioral Health Crisis Response Models in Meeting Behavioral Health Goals and Improving Criminal Legal Diversion.\",\"authors\":\"Matthew Bakko, Leonard Swanson, Catherine Zettner, Kaitlyn Kok, Hosanna Fukuzawa, Sheryl Kubiak\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10597-024-01447-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Various behavioral health crisis models have been developed to advance the shared goals of improving behavioral health outcomes and increasing diversion from criminal legal systems. The effectiveness of these models is promising, yet research is needed to understand their comparative advantages. This study compares the effectiveness of three community mental health response models-co-response, mobile response, and office-based response-and law enforcement-only response in addressing key behavioral health and diversion goals. These goals include improvements to follow-ups, service linkages to community resources, crisis de-escalation, and dispositions (i.e., decreasing hospitalizations and arrests). Five partner sites in Michigan provided administrative data on crisis cases and outcomes. The sample included crisis cases from one office-based model (n = 91), two mobile response models (n = 306), and two co-response models (n = 322), along with data from the partnering law enforcement agencies at each site (n = 669). Results show that model type is associated with all key outcomes. Mobile response effectively met all examined crisis response goals, including by resolving crises informally or without hospitalization, providing links to community services, and conducting follow-ups. Co-response showed some success in meeting goals, while the law enforcement-only model showed more limited results. Additionally, law enforcement presence during a mobile crisis response produced worse disposition outcomes, while contacting a CMH during law enforcement response produced better disposition outcomes. Overall, this study contributes to SAMHSA's (2020) crisis response vision to effectively meet the behavioral health needs of those in need of service by providing \\\"someone to respond.\\\"</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10654,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Community Mental Health Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Community Mental Health Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10597-024-01447-4\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Community Mental Health Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10597-024-01447-4","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

已经开发了各种行为健康危机模型,以推进改善行为健康结果和增加刑事法律系统转移的共同目标。这些模型的有效性是有希望的,但需要研究来了解它们的比较优势。本研究比较了三种社区心理健康响应模式——共同响应、移动响应和基于办公室的响应——和仅执法响应在解决关键行为健康和转移目标方面的有效性。这些目标包括改进后续行动、服务与社区资源的联系、危机降级和处置(即减少住院和逮捕)。密歇根州的五个合作站点提供了有关危机案例和结果的行政数据。样本包括来自一个基于办公室的模型(n = 91)、两个移动响应模型(n = 306)和两个共同响应模型(n = 322)的危机案例,以及来自每个站点合作执法机构的数据(n = 669)。结果表明,模型类型与所有关键结果相关。流动应急措施有效地实现了所审查的所有危机应对目标,包括以非正式方式或不住院的方式解决危机、提供与社区服务的联系以及开展后续行动。共同应对在实现目标方面取得了一些成功,而仅靠执法的模式显示出更有限的结果。此外,在移动危机响应期间执法人员的存在产生了更差的处置结果,而在执法响应期间联系CMH产生了更好的处置结果。总体而言,本研究有助于SAMHSA(2020)危机应对愿景,通过提供“有人响应”来有效满足需要服务的人的行为健康需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Comparison of Behavioral Health Crisis Response Models in Meeting Behavioral Health Goals and Improving Criminal Legal Diversion.

Various behavioral health crisis models have been developed to advance the shared goals of improving behavioral health outcomes and increasing diversion from criminal legal systems. The effectiveness of these models is promising, yet research is needed to understand their comparative advantages. This study compares the effectiveness of three community mental health response models-co-response, mobile response, and office-based response-and law enforcement-only response in addressing key behavioral health and diversion goals. These goals include improvements to follow-ups, service linkages to community resources, crisis de-escalation, and dispositions (i.e., decreasing hospitalizations and arrests). Five partner sites in Michigan provided administrative data on crisis cases and outcomes. The sample included crisis cases from one office-based model (n = 91), two mobile response models (n = 306), and two co-response models (n = 322), along with data from the partnering law enforcement agencies at each site (n = 669). Results show that model type is associated with all key outcomes. Mobile response effectively met all examined crisis response goals, including by resolving crises informally or without hospitalization, providing links to community services, and conducting follow-ups. Co-response showed some success in meeting goals, while the law enforcement-only model showed more limited results. Additionally, law enforcement presence during a mobile crisis response produced worse disposition outcomes, while contacting a CMH during law enforcement response produced better disposition outcomes. Overall, this study contributes to SAMHSA's (2020) crisis response vision to effectively meet the behavioral health needs of those in need of service by providing "someone to respond."

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
3.70%
发文量
133
期刊介绍: Community Mental Health Journal focuses on the needs of people experiencing serious forms of psychological distress, as well as the structures established to address those needs. Areas of particular interest include critical examination of current paradigms of diagnosis and treatment, socio-structural determinants of mental health, social hierarchies within the public mental health systems, and the intersection of public mental health programs and social/racial justice and health equity. While this is the journal of the American Association for Community Psychiatry, we welcome manuscripts reflecting research from a range of disciplines on recovery-oriented services, public health policy, clinical delivery systems, advocacy, and emerging and innovative practices.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信