Genesungsbegleitung und stationsäquivalente Behandlung

Schwarz, Julian; Geißler, Markus; Küsel, Madeleine; Müller, Katharina; Unterlauf, Christin; Bechdolf, Andreas; Peter, Sebastian von

doi:10.1055/a-1193-8261

Cited by 10 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Inzwischen hat sich StäB an über 60 Krankenhäusern in 12 deutschen Bundesländern erfolgreich etabliert, und zeigt weiterhin eine fortlaufende Zunahme [10]. Verschiedene Publikationen verdeutlichen gleichzeitig die vielfältigen Umsetzungsmöglichkeiten der StäB [11][12][13][14][15][16][17].…”

Section: Home Treatmentunclassified

Stationsäquivalente Behandlung (StäB) im Vergleich mit vollstationärer Behandlung: 12-Monats-Follow-up Ergebnisse einer mittels Propensity-Score gematchten retrospektiven Kohortenstudie.

Nikolaidis,

Weinmann,

Döring

et al. 2023

Psychiatr Prax

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Zusammenfassung Ziel der Studie Untersuchung der stationsäquivalenten psychiatrischen Behandlung (StäB) im Vergleich zur vollstationären psychiatrischen Behandlung hinsichtlich der Inanspruchnahme psychiatrischer Leistungen im 12-Monats-Follow-Up-Zeitraum. Methodik In einer retrospektiven Verlaufsstudie wurden 223 in StäB behandelte Patient*innen (Interventionsgruppe/IG, n=223) mit einer gematchten vollstationären Kontrollgruppe (KG, n=223) anhand von Routinedaten verglichen. Ergebnisse Die vollstationäre Wiederaufnahmerate in der IG war signifikant um 11 % geringer als in der KG. Die Anzahl der Behandlungstage in der IG war signifikant geringer als in der KG. In der IG wurden erstmalig psychiatrische Leistungen der Institutsambulanz signifikant häufiger in Anspruch genommen als in der KG. Schlussfolgerung StäB scheint einer vollstationären Behandlung überlegen zu sein, insbesondere im Hinblick auf das Risiko einer erneuten vollstationären Aufnahme. Als Folge der StäB lässt sich ein Effekt der Ambulantisierung beobachten.

show abstract

Section: Home Treatmentunclassified

Stationsäquivalente Behandlung (StäB) im Vergleich mit vollstationärer Behandlung: 12-Monats-Follow-up Ergebnisse einer mittels Propensity-Score gematchten retrospektiven Kohortenstudie.

Nikolaidis,

Weinmann,

Döring

et al. 2023

Psychiatr Prax

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, a systemic approach of Crisis Theory does not put biological vulnerability and the search for it in the center, but focuses on the resources of the individual and his or her social context. Thus, it is a more inclusive approach of dealing with psychological phenomena (Schwarz et al, 2020 ).…”

Section: An Alternative Model For Mental Distress: the Crisis Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Using Crisis Theory in Dealing With Severe Mental Illness–A Step Toward Normalization?

Baumgardt

Weinmann

2022

Front. Sociol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The perception of mental distress varies with time and culture, e.g., concerning its origin as either social or medical. This may be one reason for the moderate reliability of descriptive psychiatric diagnoses. Additionally, the mechanisms of action of most psychiatric treatments and psychotherapeutic interventions are generally unknown. Thus, these treatments have to be labeled as mostly unspecific even if they help in coping with mental distress. The psychiatric concept of mental disorders therefore has inherent limitations of precision and comprises rather fuzzy boundaries. Against this background, many people question the current process of diagnosing and categorizing mental illnesses. However, many scholars reject new approaches discussed in this context. They rather hold on to traditional diagnostic categories which therefore still play a central role in mental health practice and research and. In order to better understand the adherence to traditional psychiatric concepts, we take a closer look at one of the most widely adopted traditional concepts – the Stress-Vulnerability Model. This model has originally been introduced to tackle some problems of biological psychiatry. However, it has been misapplied with the result of drawing attention preferentially to biological vulnerability instead of a wider array of vulnerability factors including social adversity. Thus, in its current use, the Stress-Vulnerability Model provides only a vague theory for understanding mental phenomena. Therefore, we discuss the advantages and allegedly limited applicability of Crisis Theory as an alternative heuristic model for understanding the nature and development of mental distress. We outline the problems of this theory especially in applying it to severe mental disorders. We finally argue that an understanding of Crisis Theory supported by a systemic approach can be applied to most types of severe psychological disturbances implying that such an understanding may prevent or manage some negative aspects of the psychiatrization of psychosocial problems.

show abstract

“…Some of the initiators of the more recent reorganization processes in Geesthacht were also part of the de-institutionalization movement at the time and among other initiatives, contributed to the closure of one of the largest psychiatric asylums in Gütersloh/ Germany. Many years later, the concept of peer support has become increasingly popular (11,12), and was also adopted in Geesthacht, together with the concepts of recovery and empowerment that over time developed into some of the guiding principles of the care network as it is practiced now. This origin of the Geesthacht model in the 1970's and its evolution over time has led to certain conceptual tensions, for instance understanding work as therapy or as a right, tension that will be discussed to be productive further below.…”

Section: Care Network In Geesthachtmentioning

confidence: 99%

Supported Employment, Participation at Work, and Peer Support: A Qualitative, Participatory Case Study Report of the Geesthacht Model

Peter¹,

Göppert²,

Ziegenhagen³

et al. 2021

Front. Psychiatry

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: For people who have experienced mental health crises or psychosocial disabilities, it is considerably more difficult to receive support to participate in work on an equal basis with others. In the town of Geesthacht, in Northern Germany, an integrative care network was implemented that allows for acute psychiatric treatment as well as participation in work and activities. This paper aims to explore the principles, advantages, and challenges of this innovative project.Methodology: Within the context of a participatory and collaborative process evaluation of a prospective controlled cohort study (PsychCare), researchers with and without experiential expertise conducted expert interviews and focus groups to evaluate the experiences of 37 employees, with and without lived experience, from various institutions associated with this care network. The data was analyzed using qualitative content analysis.Results: It was the change from financial compensation paid on a daily basis to a global treatment budget that allowed for a significant reduction of hospital beds in Geesthacht and freed up resources to implement a complex care network. Since then, various possibilities for participation, work, and activities for former service users, some of which are compensated financially, have been made available. These developments now allow for a less bureaucratic and often smooth transition from being a service user to involvement in participatory activities in the role of a peer, which is frequently perceived to be empowering and beneficial by participants with lived experience. At the same time, this care model has led to multiple role conflicts and different challenges for all parties involved.Conclusion: This innovative project in Geesthacht demonstrates the multifaceted potential of a global treatment budget system in the field of mental health care. To address certain downsides of the Geesthacht model, further development is necessary.

show abstract

Genesungsbegleitung und stationsäquivalente Behandlung

Cited by 10 publications

References 26 publications

Stationsäquivalente Behandlung (StäB) im Vergleich mit vollstationärer Behandlung: 12-Monats-Follow-up Ergebnisse einer mittels Propensity-Score gematchten retrospektiven Kohortenstudie.

Stationsäquivalente Behandlung (StäB) im Vergleich mit vollstationärer Behandlung: 12-Monats-Follow-up Ergebnisse einer mittels Propensity-Score gematchten retrospektiven Kohortenstudie.

Using Crisis Theory in Dealing With Severe Mental Illness–A Step Toward Normalization?

Supported Employment, Participation at Work, and Peer Support: A Qualitative, Participatory Case Study Report of the Geesthacht Model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About