Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T15:53:28.253Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Deinstitutionalization in the Netherlands and the effectiveness of act to maintain contact with the severe mentally ill

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 April 2020

S. Sytema
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
J.W. Bloemers
Affiliation:
Institute of Mental Health Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
L. Wunderink
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands Institute of Mental Health Friesland, Leeuwarden, Groningen, The Netherlands
L. Roorda
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands Institute of Mental Health Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Background and Aims

Deinstitutionalisation may put part of the severe mentally ill patients at risk to deteriorate in the community, mainly because they are difficult to engage with services. Assertive community treatment (ACT) is widely seen as an adequate answer for these difficult to engage patients. ACT is now rapidly implemented in many European mental health services, but recently the evidence base is questioned. Positive results of randomised trials in the US could not be replicated in the UK.

Method

In Groningen (The Netherlands) a psychiatric case register (PCR) is in operation since 1986, and now covers a catchment area of 1.6 million inhabitants. It is a perfect tool to study the transition from inpatient to community care.

We did a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to study the effectiveness of the first ACT team in our region, using the PCR to measure primary outcomes. It is the only RCT of ACT in the Netherlands. In total 118 patients were randomized to two conditions. The primary research questions were:

  1. Is ACT better than standard care in maintaining contact with patients?

  2. Is ACT better than standard care in reducing the use of inpatient care?

Results

ACT was superior in engaging patients to services, but no effect on the use of inpatient beds were found. Moreover, we did not find benefits in functioning, quality of life and unmet needs.

Conclusions

Too many patients are lost in standard care and therefore we highly value the sustained contact ability of ACT.

Type
S15. Symposium: Transition from Psychiatric in Patient to Community Care: A European Perspective (Organised By The AEP Section On Epidemiology And Social Psychiatry)
Copyright
Copyright © European Psychiatric Association 2007
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.