COSTS AND BENEFITS OF HOSPITAL AND DAY TREATMENT WITH COMMUNITY CARE OF AFFECTIVE AND SCHIZOPHRENIC DISORDERS

Citation
D. Wiersma et al., COSTS AND BENEFITS OF HOSPITAL AND DAY TREATMENT WITH COMMUNITY CARE OF AFFECTIVE AND SCHIZOPHRENIC DISORDERS, British Journal of Psychiatry, 166, 1995, pp. 52-59
Citations number
43
Categorie Soggetti
Psychiatry,Psychiatry
ISSN journal
00071250
Volume
166
Year of publication
1995
Supplement
27
Pages
52 - 59
Database
ISI
SICI code
0007-1250(1995)166:<52:CABOHA>2.0.ZU;2-A
Abstract
Background. A randomised controlled trial of day treatment with commun ity care for patients with schizophrenic and affective disorders, refe rred for in-patient psychiatric treatment, was conducted to evaluate p atterns of treatment and the course of illness with its psychosocial c onsequences over a period of two years. Method. Seventy patients, of w hom 34 had affective and 36 had schizophrenic disorder, were assigned to the experimental condition (day treatment with ambulatory and domic iliary care), and 33 patients, of whom 16 had affective and 17 had sch izophrenic disorder, were assigned to the control condition of standar d clinical care. Results. Day treatment with community care was feasib le for 40.6% of the affective patients and 33.3% of the schizophrenic patients. The direct treatment costs of both disorders, based on numbe rs of in- and day-patient days and out-patient contacts over two years , appeared more or less the same. Patients benefited equally from day treatment as from in-patient treatment, although there were some gains in self-care and in functioning in the household among experimentals. Although schizophrenics were socioeconomically worse off, and also su ffered from more (severe) symptoms and social disabilities than the af fective patients at entry into the study, they were similar at two yea rs. This finding is unexpected, compared with other follow-up studies. Extra cost for patients and families were not observed. Patients and their families in the experimental condition were significantly more s atisfied with the treatment. Experimental patients spent much more tim e at home during admission, remained much less time in secluded wards, and were more compliant with treatment. Conclusions. Day treatment co uld be considered a cost-effective alternative to in-patient treatment .