Illness management and recovery programme for people with severe mental illness

Korsbek, Lisa; Dalum, Helle Stentoft; Lindschou, Jane; Eplov, Lene Falgaard

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd011071

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…not as high an exposure to IMR as wanted. Therefore, in order to get a robust answer to whether IMR is an effective program or not, more research is needed, among others there is a need for collecting the evidence from randomized trials of IMR in a systematic review with a meta-analysis, which is under preparation [ 25 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Illness management and recovery: Clinical outcomes of a randomized clinical trial in community mental health centers

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveIllness Management and Recovery (IMR) is a psychosocial intervention with a recovery-oriented approach. The program has been evaluated in different settings; however evidence for the effects of IMR is still deficient. The aim of this trial was to investigate the benefits and harms of the IMR program compared with treatment as usual in Danish patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder.MethodThe trial was designed as a randomized, assessor-blinded, multi-center, clinical trial investigating the IMR program compared with usual treatment. 198 people diagnosed with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder participated. The primary outcome was the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF-F) at the end of intervention and the secondary and explorative outcomes included severity of symptoms and service utilization.ResultsIMR had no significant effect on functioning, symptoms, substance use or service utilization.ConclusionThis randomized trial contributes to the evidence base of IMR by providing a methodological solid base for its conclusions; however the trial has some important limitations. More research is needed to get a firm answer on the effectiveness of the IMR.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Illness management and recovery: Clinical outcomes of a randomized clinical trial in community mental health centers

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To our knowledge, there has hitherto been one review published in 2014 on the IMR program that included studies published before June 2011 ( 18 ), a systematic review on self-management interventions which included IMR ( 19 ), and a review protocol ( 20 ) with similar outcomes as this paper. Another review published in 2002 compared 40 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in individual components of IMR, such as knowledge of mental illness, medication adherence, symptom relapses and rates of re-hospitalization, and severity and distress of persistent symptoms ( 21 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of Illness Management and Recovery program on people with severe mental illnesses: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Goh¹,

Yong²,

Li³

2023

Front. Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe Illness Management and Recovery (IMR) program has been established in response to the challenges faced by people with severe mental illnesses (SMIs). The program emphasizes the self-management of mental health conditions and the achievement of personally meaningful goals. However, reviews on its efficacy remain scarce, especially in recent years.ObjectiveThis review aimed to examine the efficacy of IMR in improving personal-recovery outcomes among people with SMIs.MethodsA search was conducted on seven databases (CINAHL, Embase, ProQuest, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) from inception to February 2022, without limits on the dates and types of publications. Studies were included if they had examined the efficacy of IMR in one or more outcomes, investigated at least one group of participants, and been published in English. The participants were adults (at least 16 years of age) with a formal diagnosis of at least one SMI.ResultsFourteen studies were included in this review, and eight outcomes were examined: personal recovery, global functioning, social functioning, hope, perceived social support, quality of life, substance abuse, and knowledge of mental illness. There is limited evidence on the superiority of IMR to existing treatment plans or other interventions in improving the outcomes of interest among people with SMIs. However, the low attendance rates in many included studies suggest the presence of a threshold of exposure to IMR beyond which its treatment effects could be observed. Suggestions for future IMR implementation are discussed.ConclusionsThe IMR program may serve as an alternative or complementary intervention for people with SMIs, especially with enhanced program exposure and access to resource materials.Systematic review registrationhttps://inplasy.com/inplasy-2022-10-0005/.

show abstract

Illness management and recovery program for mental health problems: reducing symptoms and increasing social functioning

Tan

Ishak

Lim

et al. 2017

Journal of Clinical Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Illness management and recovery programme for people with severe mental illness

Cited by 4 publications

References 48 publications

Illness management and recovery: Clinical outcomes of a randomized clinical trial in community mental health centers

Illness management and recovery: Clinical outcomes of a randomized clinical trial in community mental health centers

Effectiveness of Illness Management and Recovery program on people with severe mental illnesses: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Illness management and recovery program for mental health problems: reducing symptoms and increasing social functioning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About