Evaluation of a mental health treatment court with assertive community treatment

Cosden, Merith; Ellens, Jeffrey K.; Schnell, Jeffrey; Yamini-Diouf, Yasmeen; Wolfe, Maren M.

doi:10.1002/bsl.542

Cited by 183 publications

(124 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

119

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The increase in life satisfaction during the follow-up period in both groups was subtle even though previous studies demonstrated an increase in life satisfaction following the ACT program [26,27]. Our result is consistent with a Japanese study reporting that the ACT program had no significant relationship with life satisfaction [28].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Fifteen-Month Follow-Up of an Assertive Community Treatment Program for Chronic Patients With Mental Illness

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of an Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) program on psychiatric symptoms, global functioning, life satisfaction, and recovery-promoting relationships among individuals with mental illness. Methods: Participants were patients at the Suwon Mental Health Center. Thirty-two patients were part of the ACT program and 32 patients matched for age, sex, and mental illness were in a standard case-management program and served as a control group. Follow-up with patients occurred every 3 months during the 15 months after a baseline interview. Participants completed the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) Scale, Life Satisfaction Scale, and Recovery-Promoting Relationship Scale (RPRS). Results: No significant differences were noted in the sociodemographic characteristics of the ACT and the case-management group. According to the BPRS, the ACT group showed a significant reduction in symptom severity, but the ACT program was not significantly more effective at reducing psychiatric symptoms from baseline to the 15-month follow-up compared to the case-management approach. The ACT group showed more significant improvement than the control group in terms of the GAF Scale. Both groups showed no significant differences in the change of life satisfaction and in the change of recovery-promoting relationships. We observed a significant increase in recovery-promoting relationships in the control group, but the degree of change of recovery-promoting relationships through time flow between groups was not significantly different. Discussion: In this study, we observed that ACT was significantly better at improving the GAF than case management and that participation in ACT was associated with a significant decrease in BPRS scores. However, ACT did not demonstrate an absolute superiority over the standard case-management approach in terms of the BPRS and the measures of life satisfaction and recovery-promoting relationships. Conclusions: ACT may have some advantages over a standard case management approach.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Fifteen-Month Follow-Up of an Assertive Community Treatment Program for Chronic Patients With Mental Illness

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Broward study has produced a series of papers on the operation of the court (Petrila, Poythress, McGaha, & Boothroyd, 2001;Poythress, Petrila, McGaha, & Boothroyd, 2002), and the characteristics and service use of the participants (Boothroyd et al, 2003), with analyses on participant outcomes now being conducted. The Santa Barbara study was a randomized control trial comparing a MHC participant sample and a treatment-as-usual (control) sample (Cosden, Ellens, Schnell, Yasmeen, & Wolfe, 2003). Both samples had been referred and found eligible for the MHC, but were randomly assigned into their respective groupings.…”

Section: Gaps In the Knowledge Base Of Mental Health Courtsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Evaluation of the Bureau of Justice Assistance Mental Health Court Initiative

Steadman¹,

Redlich²

2006

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…38,39 Persons with a serious and pervasive mental illness who were randomized to a mental health treatment court with an assertive community treatment model of case management experienced greater improvements in mental health status, functioning, and drug use, but not quality of life or alcohol use, compared with treatment as usual. 77 In persons who were seriously mentally ill and homeless, there was no difference in mental health, alcohol and drug use, or quality of life at 1 year after release among those randomized to an assertive community treatment team, forensic specialist case managers based in community mental health agencies, or referral to a community mental health center. 124,125 …”

Section: Mental Health Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Services after release-Three interventions were implemented in the community after release, 38,39,77,124,125 and 2 of these positively affected substance abuse outcomes. 38,39,77 In adults on parole who received daily, automated phone assessment in the month after release, the addition of feedback and a recommendation led to greater improvements in mental health and drug and alcohol use.…”

Section: Mental Health Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…38,39,77 In adults on parole who received daily, automated phone assessment in the month after release, the addition of feedback and a recommendation led to greater improvements in mental health and drug and alcohol use. 38,39 Persons with a serious and pervasive mental illness who were randomized to a mental health treatment court with an assertive community treatment model of case management experienced greater improvements in mental health status, functioning, and drug use, but not quality of life or alcohol use, compared with treatment as usual.…”

Section: Mental Health Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials of Interventions to Improve the Health of Persons During Imprisonment and in the Year After Release

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We systematically reviewed randomized controlled trials of interventions to improve the health of people during imprisonment or in the year after release. We searched 14 biomedical and social science databases in 2014, and identified 95 studies.Most studies involved only men or a majority of men (70/83 studies in which gender was specified); only 16 studies focused on adolescents. Most studies were conducted in the United States (n = 57). The risk of bias for outcomes in almost all studies was unclear or high (n=91). In 59 studies, interventions led to improved mental health, substance use, infectious diseases, or health service utilization outcomes; in 42 of these studies, outcomes were measured in the community after release.Improving the health of people who experience imprisonment requires knowledge generation and knowledge translation, including implementation of effective interventions.Worldwide, more than 11 million people are imprisoned at any given time, and the prison population continues to grow at a rate faster than that of the general population. 1 Substantial evidence reveals that people who have experienced imprisonment have poor health compared with the general population, as indicated by the prevalence of mental illness, infectious diseases, chronic diseases, and mortality. 2 There are several reasons to focus on improving the health of people who experience imprisonment. 3 The burden of disease in this population affects the general population directly through increased health care costs and through the transmission of communicable diseases (e.g., HIV, HCV, and tuberculosis) after people are released from detention. Imprisonment has also been associated with worse health in family members of those who are detained, compared with the general population, including chronic diseases 4 and poor mental health 5,6 in adult relatives and mortality in male children. 7 At the community level, higher rates of incarceration have been associated with adverse health outcomes, such as sexually transmitted infections and teen pregnancies. 8 There is also evidence that poor health in persons who are released from detention, particularly those with inadequately treated mental illness and substance use disorders, 3 may affect public safety and reincarceration rates, 3 and that better access to health care is associated with less recidivism. 9,10 Finally, the right to health and health care is enshrined in international human rights documents, 11,12 and is a legislated responsibility of governments in many countries.Intervening during imprisonment and at the time of release could improve the health of people who experience imprisonment and public health overall. 13 To address this gap, we systematically reviewed randomized controlled trials of interventions to improve health in persons during imprisonment and in the year after release.We chose this population because we view imprisonment as a unique opportunity to deliver and to link with interventions for this population, and to highlight interventions t...

show abstract

Evaluation of a mental health treatment court with assertive community treatment

Cited by 183 publications

References 26 publications

Fifteen-Month Follow-Up of an Assertive Community Treatment Program for Chronic Patients With Mental Illness

Fifteen-Month Follow-Up of an Assertive Community Treatment Program for Chronic Patients With Mental Illness

An Evaluation of the Bureau of Justice Assistance Mental Health Court Initiative

A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials of Interventions to Improve the Health of Persons During Imprisonment and in the Year After Release

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About