The role of mental health service research in promoting effective treatment for adults with schizophrenia†
Background: Significant gaps exist between scientific knowledge about the efficacy of treatments for mental disorders and the availability of efficacious treatments in routine practice. Mental health service research can help bridge this gap between basic clinical research and the usual care afforded adults with mental disorders.
Aims: To illustrate this potential, data on the efficacy of treatment for schizophrenia are reviewed.
Methods: The treatments reviewed include pharmacotherapies, psychological interventions, family interventions, vocational rehabilitation and assertive community treatment and case management. Using treatment recommendations based upon outcome data about these treatments and the results of a large survey of usual care for schizophrenia from the Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team (PORT) project, examples of current deficiencies in the usual treatment of adult mental disorders and relevant questions that need to be addressed by mental health services research are identified.
Results: Major deficiencies in treatment that were identified include inappropriate dosing with antipsychotic agents, underutilization of adjunctive antidepressant therapy, very low rates of prescription of psychosocial interventions and lack of continuity between inpatient and outpatient settings.
Discussion: These findings raise serious concerns about access to care and the appropriateness and quality of care that is offered.
Implications: This knowledge about what treatments work for schizophrenia and the patterns of current care suggest the following major questions be addressed by mental health services research: What is the nature of care currently being offered adults with mental disorders? To what degree does this care measure up to scientifically derived quality of care and treatment standards? What is the effectiveness of new technologies under usual practice conditions? For which patients are they cost-effective and under what conditions? How should financial incentives be structured within systems of care to promote the most cost-effective use of new technologies? How should service systems themselves be organized to promote appropriate access and utilization? What educational, organizational and financing interventions promote adoption of effective interventions? Do we have valid methods for assessing quality of care? What strategies (interventions) are effective at improving the quality of care? In addition, we need to develop strategies that transfer mental health services research technologies into practice. These include: (i) development of outcome measures that meet scientific standards and that are practical for general application in service systems to facilitate ‘outcome management’; (ii) development of quality of care assessment methodologies that are practical and scientifically sound and (iii) cost-effectiveness methodologies.
Mental health services research can facilitate the translation of knowledge developed from basic clinical research into more effective systems of care. The tools used by health services research to this end include examination of patterns of usual care in relation to scientifically established standards of efficacious care, interventions to improve the effectiveness of care and examination of the impacts of the organization and financing of services on outcomes and costs. In short, mental health service research holds high on its agenda the translation of basic and clinical research into practice.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Mental Health Policy and Economics publishes high quality empirical, analytical and methodologic papers focusing on the application of health and economic research and policy analysis in mental health. It offers an international forum to enable the different participants in mental health policy and economics - psychiatrists involved in research and care and other mental health workers, health services researchers, health economists, policy makers, public and private health providers, advocacy groups, and the pharmaceutical industry - to share common information in a common language.