Pablo Nicaise

Service provision and barriers to care for homeless people with mental health problems across 14 European capital cities

BackgroundMental health problems are disproportionately higher amongst homeless people. Many barriers exist for homeless people with mental health problems in accessing treatment yet little research has been done on service provision and quality of care for this group. The aim of this paper is to assess current service provision and identify barriers to care for homeless people with mental health problems in 14 European capital cities.MethodTwo methods of data collection were employed; (i) In two highly deprived areas in each of the 14 European capital cities, homeless-specific services providing mental health, social care or general health services were assessed. Data were obtained on service characteristics, staff and programmes provided. (ii) Semi-structured interviews were conducted in each area with experts in mental health care provision for homeless people in order to determine the barriers to care and ways to overcome them.ResultsAcross the 14 capital cities, 111 homeless-specific services were assessed. Input from professionally qualified mental health staff was reported as low, as were levels of active outreach and case finding. Out-of-hours service provision appears inadequate and high levels of service exclusion criteria were evident. Prejudice in the services towards homeless people, a lack of co-ordination amongst services, and the difficulties homeless people face in obtaining health insurance were identified as major barriers to service provision.ConclusionsWhile there is variability in service provision across European capital cities, the reported barriers to service accessibility are common. Homeless-specific services are more responsive to the initial needs of homeless people with mental health problems, while generic services tend to be more conducive to long term care. Further research is needed to determine the effectiveness of different service delivery models, including the most effective coordination of homeless specific and generic services.

Psychiatric Advance Directives as a complex and multistage intervention: a realist systematic review

Psychiatric Advance Directives (PADs) are documents that allow users with severe and chronic mental illnesses to notify their treatment preferences for future crisis relapses and to appoint a surrogate decision-maker for a period of incompetence. Despite many supposed clinical and organisational benefits, their take-up rate has remained very low and their clinical evaluation has given contradictory results for organisational outcomes. Intermediary results are available, however, which rely on different theoretical views about how PADs are supposed to work. We carried out a realist systematic review that considered the PAD as a multistage intervention including the definition of the document, its completion and its access and honouring. We identified the theoretical frameworks underlying this kind of intervention and examined the available evidence that supported or contradicted the expectations at each stage of the intervention. Forty-seven references were retrieved, ranging from 1996 to 2009. Three frameworks underlie a PAD intervention: enhancement of the autonomy of the user, improvement of the therapeutic alliance and integration of care through partnership working. Although designed in the first place with a view to sustaining the users autonomy, results indicate that the intervention is more efficient within a therapeutic alliance framework. Moreover, much is known about the completion process and the content of the document, but very little about its access and honouring. The mixture of expectations makes the purpose of PADs unclear, for example, crisis relapse prevention or management, advance planning of long-term or emergency care, or reduction in the resort to coercion. This may explain their low take-up rates. Hence, frameworks and purpose have to be clarified. The shape of the whole intervention at each stage relies on such clarification. More research is needed, particularly on the later stages of the intervention, as the evidence for how PADs should be implemented is still incomplete.

Mental health-care provision for marginalized groups across Europe: findings from the PROMO study

BACKGROUND Providing mental health care to socially marginalized groups is a challenge. There is limited evidence on what form of mental health-care generic (i.e. not targeting a specific social group) and group-specific services provide to socially marginalized groups in Europe. AIM To describe the characteristics of services providing mental health care for people with mental disorders from socially marginalized groups in European capitals. METHODS In two highly deprived areas in different European capital cities, services providing some form of mental health care for six marginalized groups, i.e. homeless, street sex workers, asylum seekers/refugees, irregular migrants, travelling communities and long-term unemployed, were identified and contacted. Data were obtained on service characteristics, staff and programmes. RESULTS In 8 capital cities, 516 out of 575 identified services were assessed (90%); 297 services were generic (18-79 per city) and 219 group-specific (13-50). All cities had group-specific services for the homeless, street sex workers and asylum seekers/refugees. Generic services provided more health-care programmes. Group-specific services provided more outreach programmes and social care. There was a substantial overlap in the programmes provided by the two types of services. CONCLUSIONS In deprived areas of European capitals, a considerable number of services provide mental health care to socially marginalized groups. Access to these services often remains difficult. Group-specific services have been widely established, but their role overlaps with that of generic services. More research and conceptual clarity on the function of group-specific services are required.

Mental health care delivery system reform in Belgium: The challenge of achieving deinstitutionalisation whilst addressing fragmentation of care at the same time

Most mental health care delivery systems in welfare states currently face two major issues: deinstitutionalisation and fragmentation of care. Belgium is in the process of reforming its mental health care delivery system with the aim of simultaneously strengthening community care and improving integration of care. The new policy model attempts to strike a balance between hospitals and community services, and is based on networks of services. We carried out a content analysis of the policy blueprint for the reform and performed an ex-ante evaluation of its plan of operation, based on the current knowledge of mental health service networks. When we examined the policys multiple aims, intermediate goals, suggested tools, and their articulation, we found that it was unclear how the new policy could achieve its goals. Indeed, deinstitutionalisation and integration of care require different network structures, and different modes of governance. Furthermore, most of the mechanisms contained within the new policy were not sufficiently detailed. Consequently, three major threats to the effectiveness of the reform were identified. These were: issues concerning the relationship between network structure and purpose, the continued influence of hospitals despite the goal of deinstitutionalisation, and the heterogeneity in the actual implementation of the new policy.

Mental health care for irregular migrants in Europe: Barriers and how they are overcome

BackgroundIrregular migrants (IMs) are exposed to a wide range of risk factors for developing mental health problems. However, little is known about whether and how they receive mental health care across European countries. The aims of this study were (1) to identify barriers to mental health care for IMs, and (2) to explore ways by which these barriers are overcome in practice.MethodsData from semi-structured interviews with 25 experts in the field of mental health care for IMs in the capital cities of 14 European countries were analysed using thematic analysis.ResultsExperts reported a range of barriers to mental health care for IMs. These include the absence of legal entitlements to health care in some countries or a lack of awareness of such entitlements, administrative obstacles, a shortage of culturally sensitive care, the complexity of the social needs of IMs, and their fear of being reported and deported. These barriers can be partly overcome by networks of committed professionals and supportive services. NGOs have become important initial points of contact for IMs, providing mental health care themselves or referring IMs to other suitable services. However, these services are often confronted with the ethical dilemma of either acting according to the legislation and institutional rules or providing care for humanitarian reasons, which involves the risk of acting illegally and providing care without authorisation.ConclusionsEven in countries where access to health care is legally possible for IMs, various other barriers remain. Some of these are common to all migrants, whilst others are specific for IMs. Attempts at improving mental health care for IMs should consider barriers beyond legal entitlement, including communicating information about entitlement to mental health care professionals and patients, providing culturally sensitive care and ensuring sufficient resources.

Using Social Network Analysis for Assessing Mental Health and Social Services Inter-Organisational Collaboration: Findings in Deprived Areas in Brussels and London

Fragmentation in mental health and social care delivery should be addressed at the system level. A Social Network Analysis was carried out on relations between services in order to assess Leutz’s levels of care integration: linkage, coordination, and full integration. Findings for deprived areas in Brussels and London show that linkage across clusters of services is weak in both networks. However, the integration of care relies on the level of linkage in London, while in Brussels it is more dependent on central services playing brokerage roles. The method offers a useful and complementary basis for evaluating the integration of care.

Users’ and Health Professionals’ Values in Relation to a Psychiatric Intervention: The Case of Psychiatric Advance Directives

Although clinical and organisational benefits have been expected from Psychiatric Advance Directives (PADs), their take-up rates remain low and their evaluation disappointing. The endorsement of PADs by stakeholders is decisive for their use and understanding stakeholders’ preferences for implementation is crucial. A Multinomial Discrete Choice analysis was carried out of options for designing, completing, and honouring PADs, with a view to enhancing user autonomy, therapeutic alliance, care coordination, and feasibility. Although autonomy underlies the whole process, the criteria determining options varied with the stage of the intervention. These criteria should be taken into account in future PAD intervention and evaluation processes.

In-patient treatment in functional and sectorised care: patient satisfaction and length of stay.

BACKGROUND Debate exists as to whether functional care, in which different psychiatrists are responsible for in- and out-patient care, leads to better in-patient treatment as compared with sectorised care, in which the same psychiatrist is responsible for care across settings. Aims To compare patient satisfaction with in-patient treatment and length of stay in functional and sectorised care. METHOD Patients with an ICD-10 diagnosis of psychotic, affective or anxiety/somatoform disorders consecutively admitted to an adult acute psychiatric ward in 23 hospitals across 11 National Health Service trusts in England were recruited. Patient satisfaction with in-patient care and length of stay (LoS) were compared (trial registration ISRCTN40256812). RESULTS In total, 2709 patients were included, of which 1612 received functional and 1097 sectorised care. Patient satisfaction was significantly higher in sectorised care (β = 0.54, 95% CI 0.35-0.73, P<0.001). This difference remained significant when adjusting for locality and patient characteristics. LoS was 6.9 days shorter for patients in sectorised care (β = -6.89, 95% CI -11.76 to -2.02, P<0.001), but this difference did not remain significant when adjusting for clustering by hospital (β = -4.89, 95% CI -13.34 to 3.56, P = 0.26). CONCLUSIONS This is the first robust evidence that patient satisfaction with in-patient treatment is higher in sectorised care, whereas findings for LoS are less conclusive. If patient satisfaction is seen as a key criterion, sectorised care seems preferable. Declarations of interest None.

Implementing a Nation-Wide Mental Health Care Reform: An Analysis of Stakeholders’ Priorities

Belgium has recently reformed its mental health care delivery system with the goals to strengthen the community-based supply of care, care integration, and the social rehabilitation of users and to reduce the resort to hospitals. We assessed whether these different reform goals were endorsed by stakeholders. One-hundred and twenty-two stakeholders ranked, online, eighteen goals of the reform according to their priorities. Stakeholders supported the goals of social rehabilitation of users and community care but were reluctant to reduce the resort to hospitals. Stakeholders were averse to changes in treatment processes, particularly in relation to the reduction of the resort to hospitals and mechanisms for more care integration. Goals heterogeneity and discrepancies between stakeholders’ perspectives and policy priorities are likely to produce an uneven implementation of the reform process and, hence, reduce its capacity to achieve the social rehabilitation of users.

Factors associated with quality of services for marginalized groups with mental health problems in 14 European countries

BackgroundDifferent service characteristics are known to influence mental health care delivery. Much less is known about the impact of contextual factors, such as the socioeconomic circumstances, on the provision of care to socially marginalized groups.The objectives of this work were to assess the organisational characteristics of services providing mental health care for marginalized groups in 14 European capital cities and to explore the associations between organisational quality, service features and country-level characteristics.Methods617 services were assessed in two highly deprived areas in 14 European capital cities. A Quality Index of Service Organisation (QISO) was developed and applied across all sites. Service characteristics and country level socioeconomic indicators were tested and related with the Index using linear regressions and random intercept linear models.ResultsThe mean (standard deviation) of the QISO score (minimum = 0; maximum = 15) varied from 8.63 (2.23) in Ireland to 12.40 (2.07) in Hungary. The number of different programmes provided was the only service characteristic significantly correlated with the QISO (p < 0.05). The national Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was inversely associated with the QISO. Nearly 15% of the variance of the QISO was attributed to country-level variables, with GDP explaining 12% of this variance.ConclusionsSocioeconomic contextual factors, in particular the national GDP are likely to influence the organisational quality of services providing mental health care for marginalized groups. Such factors should be considered in international comparative studies. Their significance for different types of services should be explored in further research.