Download This Paper
Preprints with The Lancet is a collaboration between The Lancet Group of journals and SSRN to facilitate the open sharing of preprints for early engagement, community comment, and collaboration. Preprints available here are not Lancet publications or necessarily under review with a Lancet journal. These preprints are early-stage research papers that have not been peer-reviewed. The usual SSRN checks and a Lancet-specific check for appropriateness and transparency have been applied. The findings should not be used for clinical or public health decision-making or presented without highlighting these facts. For more information, please see the FAQs.
Improved Patient-Reported Outcomes After Interprofessional Training in Mental Health: A Nonrandomized Intervention Study
28 Pages Posted: 7 Jun 2019
More...Abstract
Background: Collaborative interprofessional practices are essential in caring for people with complex mental health problems. Despite the difficulties of demonstrating positive impacts of interprofessional education (IPE), it is believed to enhance interprofessional practices. We aimed to assess impacts on patient satisfaction and self-reported mental health status in a psychiatric ward.
Methods: We conducted a nonrandomized intervention study with patient satisfaction, psychological distress, and health status as outcomes. Mental health inpatients were referred to either an interprofessional training unit (intervention group) or to a conventionally organized ward (comparison group). Outcomes were assessed using the Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10), and the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ-8).
Results: The intervention group included 129 patients, the comparison group 123. The former group reported better mental health status than the latter; the postintervention mean difference between them being 5.30 (95% CI 2.71-7.89; p = 0.001; SF-36), with an effect size of 0.24. The intervention group patients also scored higher on satisfaction (mean difference 1.01; 95% CI 0.06-1.96; p = 0.04), with an effect size of 0.31. The groups' mean scores of psychological distress were identical.
Conclusion: Our results support the hypothesized value of interprofessional mental healthcare: intervention group patients reported higher scores regarding mental health status and satisfaction than did comparison group patients. As IPE interventions have rarely involved patients and fewer have taken place in practice settings, further research into both the processes and the long-term effects of IPE in mental healthcare is needed.
Trial Registration: The study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03070977 on March 6, 2017.
Funding Statement: This research received no grants from funding agencies in either the commercial or the not-for-profit sectors.
Declaration of Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest.
Ethics Approval Statement: The authors assert that all procedures contributing to this work comply with the ethical standards of the relevant national and institutional committees and the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2008. The study was approved by the Danish Data Protection Agency (2008-58-0020), and required no further ethical approval according to Danish legislation (16-000014).
Keywords: IPE, Patient care team, PROMS, Medical education, Patient satisfaction, SF-36
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation