Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorEllison, Marsha Langer
dc.contributor.authorRogers, E. Sally
dc.contributor.authorLyass, Asya
dc.contributor.authorMassaro, Joseph
dc.contributor.authorWewiorski, Nancy J.
dc.contributor.authorHsu, Su-Ting
dc.contributor.authorAnthony, William A.
dc.date2022-08-11T08:10:24.000
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-23T17:07:25Z
dc.date.available2022-08-23T17:07:25Z
dc.date.issued2011-07-20
dc.date.submitted2011-09-26
dc.identifier.citationPsychiatr Rehabil J. 2011 Summer;35(1):9-19. <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.2975/35.1.2011.9.19">Link to article on publisher's site</a>
dc.identifier.issn1095-158X (Linking)
dc.identifier.doi10.2975/35.1.2011.9.19
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/45336
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVE: This study examines the outcomes of a statewide implementation of Intensive Psychiatric Rehabilitation (IPR) for improving residential and employment status and earnings among individuals with severe mental illnesses and also examines its implementation with respect to mental health service utilization and costs. METHODS: This study employs a pre-post design with participants acting as their own controls for rehabilitation outcomes (residential status, vocational outcomes and earnings) comparing those who "completed" or had a sufficiently intense dose of IPR (one year) to those who dropped out early (before six months of service) and those who dropped out later in service (6-12 months). A separate analysis was conducted examining the relationship of IPR to other mental service use and costs using a quasi-experimental design that contrasted IPR completers with a control group matched via propensity scores. RESULTS: The results suggested significant improvement in residential status, employment status and gross monthly earnings for IPR completers relative to other groups. IPR completers also tended to use more mental health services or have more shallow decreases in use and cost of services relative to matched controls. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Gains in rehabilitation outcomes can be expected for those who engage in and complete IPR services, but IPR cannot be expected to result in reduced overall mental health service use and costs. Rather, IPR may improve service access or perhaps ameliorate any containment effect of managed care on service use.
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.relation<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=21768073&dopt=Abstract">Link to Article in PubMed</a>
dc.relation.urlhttp://dx.doi.org/10.2975/35.1.2011.9.19
dc.subjectAdult
dc.subjectEmployment
dc.subjectFemale
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectIncome
dc.subjectIowa
dc.subjectMale
dc.subjectManaged Care Programs
dc.subjectMental Disorders
dc.subjectMental Health Services
dc.subjectOutcome Assessment (Health Care)
dc.subjectResidence Characteristics
dc.subjectState Health Plans
dc.subjectHealth Services Research
dc.subjectMental and Social Health
dc.subjectPsychiatric and Mental Health
dc.subjectPsychiatry
dc.subjectPsychiatry and Psychology
dc.titleStatewide initiative of intensive psychiatric rehabilitation: outcomes and relationship to other mental health service use
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.source.journaltitlePsychiatric rehabilitation journal
dc.source.volume35
dc.source.issue1
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://escholarship.umassmed.edu/psych_cmhsr/441
dc.identifier.contextkey2258151
html.description.abstract<p>OBJECTIVE: This study examines the outcomes of a statewide implementation of Intensive Psychiatric Rehabilitation (IPR) for improving residential and employment status and earnings among individuals with severe mental illnesses and also examines its implementation with respect to mental health service utilization and costs.</p> <p>METHODS: This study employs a pre-post design with participants acting as their own controls for rehabilitation outcomes (residential status, vocational outcomes and earnings) comparing those who "completed" or had a sufficiently intense dose of IPR (one year) to those who dropped out early (before six months of service) and those who dropped out later in service (6-12 months). A separate analysis was conducted examining the relationship of IPR to other mental service use and costs using a quasi-experimental design that contrasted IPR completers with a control group matched via propensity scores.</p> <p>RESULTS: The results suggested significant improvement in residential status, employment status and gross monthly earnings for IPR completers relative to other groups. IPR completers also tended to use more mental health services or have more shallow decreases in use and cost of services relative to matched controls.</p> <p>CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Gains in rehabilitation outcomes can be expected for those who engage in and complete IPR services, but IPR cannot be expected to result in reduced overall mental health service use and costs. Rather, IPR may improve service access or perhaps ameliorate any containment effect of managed care on service use.</p>
dc.identifier.submissionpathpsych_cmhsr/441
dc.contributor.departmentCenter for Health Policy and Research
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Psychiatry, Center for Mental Health Services Research
dc.source.pages9-19


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record