BackgroundPatient self-report allows collecting comprehensive data for the purpose of performing economic evaluations. The aim of the current study was to assess the feasibility, reliability and a part of the construct validity of a commonly applied questionnaire on healthcare utilization and productivity losses in patients with a psychiatric disorder (TiC-P).MethodsData were derived alongside two clinical trials performed in the Netherlands in patients with mental health problems. The response rate, average time of filling out the questionnaire and proportions of missing values were used as indicators of feasibility of the questionnaire. Test-retest analyses were performed including Cohen’s kappa and intra class correlation coefficients to assess reliability of the data. The construct validity was assessed by comparing patient reported data on contacts with psychotherapists and reported data on long-term absence from work with data derived from registries.ResultsThe response rate was 72%. The mean time needed for filling out the first TiC-P was 9.4 minutes. The time needed for filling out the questionnaire was 2.3 minutes less for follow up measurements. Proportions of missing values were limited (< 2.4%) except for medication for which in 10% of the cases costs could not be calculated. Cohen’s kappa was satisfactory to almost perfect for most items related to healthcare consumption and satisfactory for items on absence from work and presenteeism. Comparable results were shown by the ICCs on variables measuring volumes of medical consumption and productivity losses indicating good reliability of the questionnaire.Absolute agreement between patient-reported data and data derived from medical registrations of the psychotherapists was satisfactory. Accepting a margin of +/− seven days, the agreement on reported and registered data on long-term absence from work was satisfactory. The validity of self-reported data using the TiC-P is promising.ConclusionsThe results indicate that the TiC-P is a feasible and reliable instrument for collecting data on medical consumption and productivity losses in patients with mild to moderate mental health problems. Additionally, the construct validity of questions related to contacts with psychotherapist and long-term absence from work was satisfactory.

Providing outcome monitoring feedback to therapists seems to be a promising approach to improve outcomes in clinical practice. This study aims to examine the effect of feedback and investigate whether it is moderated by therapist characteristics. Patients (n=413) were randomly assigned to either a feedback or a no-feedback control condition. There was no significant effect of feedback in the full sample, but feedback was effective for not-on-track cases for therapists who used the feedback. Internal feedback propensity, self-efficacy, and commitment to use the feedback moderated the effects of feedback. The results demonstrate that feedback is not effective under all circumstances and therapist factors are important when implementing feedback in clinical practice.

The cross-cultural validity of the Outcome Questionnaire (OQ) in the Dutch population has been examined by comparing the psychometric properties and equivalence in factor structure and normative scores of the Dutch OQ with the original American version. Data were collected from a university (n = 268), in a community (n = 810) and from three mental health care organizations (n = 1920). Results show that the psychometric properties of the Dutch OQ were adequate and similar to the original instrument. Some differences in equivalence were found though. In factor analysis, two additional factors were found: one consisting of social role items and another that reflected anxiety and somatic symptoms. Furthermore, normative scores were different for the Dutch and American samples, and this resulted in different cut-off scores for estimating a clinically significant change in the Dutch population.

We found insufficient evidence to support the use of routine outcome monitoring using PROMs in the treatment of CMHDs, in terms of improving patient outcomes or in improving management. The findings are subject to considerable uncertainty however, due to the high risk of bias in the large majority of trials meeting the inclusion criteria, which means further research is very likely to have an important impact on the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. More research of better quality is therefore required, particularly in primary care where most CMHDs are treated.Future research should address issues of blinding of assessors and attrition, and measure a range of relevant symptom outcomes, as well as possible harmful effects of monitoring, health-related quality of life, social functioning, and costs. Studies should include people treated with drugs as well as psychological therapies, and should follow them up for longer than six months.

No abstract

English NHS and Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.

No abstract

Benefits of feedback were strongest for cases that were not progressing well in short-term therapies when both the patient and therapist received feedback on the patients' progress. Contrary to previous findings, we also found a small effect of feedback to therapists and patients in long-term therapies. Feedback to both patients and therapists may be more effective than feedback to therapists alone due to implementation issues or empowerment of the patient.