Search

Background: Prevention and Recovery Care services are residential sub-acute services in Victoria, Australia, guided by a commitment to recovery-oriented practice. The evidence regarding the effectiveness of this service model is limited, largely relying on small, localised evaluations. This study involved a state-wide investigation into the personal recovery, perceived needs for care, well-being and quality-of-life outcomes experienced by Prevention and Recovery Care services' consumers. Methods: A longitudinal cohort design examined the trajectory of self-reported personal recovery and other outcomes for consumers in 19 Victorian Prevention and Recovery Care services over 4 time points (T1 – 1 week after admission; T2 – within 1 week of discharge; T3 – 6 months after discharge; T4 – 12 months after discharge). T2–T4 time frames were extended by approximately 3 weeks due to recruitment challenges. The Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery was the primary outcome measure. Results: At T1, 298 consumers were recruited. By T4, 114 remained in the study. Participants scored higher on the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery at all three time points after T1. There were also sustained improvements on all secondary outcome measures. Improvements were then sustained at each subsequent post-intervention time point. Community inclusion and having needs for care met also improved. Conclusion: The findings provide a consistent picture of benefits for consumers using Prevention and Recovery Care services, with significant improvement in personal recovery, quality of life, mental health and well-being following an admission to a Prevention and Recovery Care service. Further attention needs to be given to how to sustain the gains made through a Prevention and Recovery Care service admission in the long term. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Shy/inhibited young children are at risk for internalising difficulties; however, for many, this temperamental style does not result in mental health problems. This study followed a population-based sample of temperamentally inhibited preschool children into mid childhood to explore the aetiology of clinical-level anxious and depressive problems. Amongst inhibited preschool children, we aimed to predict each of clinical child anxiety and depressive problems in mid childhood from a broad range of potential risks (demographics, traumatic events and broader recent stressors, parents' well-being, and parenting practices). This study is based on data from a wider population trial of Cool Little Kids that recruited a representative sample of inhibited preschool children enrolled in their year before starting school. In 2011–2012, an inhibition screen was universally distributed to parents of children in their year before school (age 4 years) across eight diverse government areas in Melbourne, Australia. Participants were 545 parents of inhibited preschoolers (78% uptake, 545/703) who were followed to mid childhood (three annual waves 2015–2017, age 7–10 years) with 84% retention (456/545). Parents completed questionnaires spanning child ages 4–10 years, along with diagnostic interviews for child anxiety. Children also completed questionnaires in mid childhood. The questionnaires encompassed a variety of potential risks including sociodemographics, traumatic events, recent life stressors, parent wellbeing and parenting practices. In mid childhood, 57% (246/430) of inhibited preschoolers had a clinical level of anxiety problems while 22% (95/432) had depressive problems (by one or more sources). The aetiology analyses highlighted parent distress and parenting practices (overinvolved/protective, harsh discipline) as key predictors of inhibited preschoolers' internalising problems by mid childhood. Some high-risk families may not have participated. Child depression was not assessed with a diagnostic interview. The measures did not include every possible risk factor. The findings lend support to parenting programs for shy/inhibited young children that aim to prevent the development of anxiety and depression as they grow. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Older Australians make up 46% of all potentially preventable hospitalisations (PPHs) and people living with dementia are at significantly greater risk. While policy reforms aim to reduce PPHs, there is currently little evidence available on what drives this, especially for people living with dementia. This study examines patterns of PPHs in people living with dementia to inform service delivery and the development of evidence-based interventions.Methods: We used the Victorian Admitted Episodes Dataset from Victoria, Australia, to extract data for people aged 50 and over with a diagnosis of dementia between 2015 and 2016. Potentially avoidable admissions, known as ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSCs), were identified. The chi-square test was used to detect differences between admissions for ACSCs and non-ACSCs by demographic, geographical, and administrative factors. Predictors of ACSCs admissions were analysed using univariate and multiple logistic regression.Results: Of the 8156 hospital records, there were 3884 (48%) ACSCs admissions, of which admissions for urinary tract infections accounted for 31%, followed by diabetes complications (21%). Mean bed-days were 8.26 for non-ACSCs compared with 9.74 for ACSCs (p ≤ 0.001). There were no differences between admissions for ACSCs and non-ACSCs by sex, marital status, region (rural vs metro), and admission source (private accommodation vs residential facility). Culture and language predicted ASCS admission rates in the univariate regression analyses, with ACSC admission rates increasing by 20 and 29% if English was not the preferred language or if an interpreter was required, respectively. Results from the multiple regression analysis confirmed that language was a significant predictor of ACSC admission rates.Conclusions: Improved primary health care may help to reduce the most common causes of PPHs for people living with dementia, particularly for those from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: In Victoria, Prevention and Recovery Care Services have been established to provide a partial alternative to inpatient admissions through short-term residential mental health care in the community. This study set out to determine whether Prevention and Recovery Care Services are achieving their objectives in relation to reducing service use and costs, fostering least restrictive care and leading to positive clinical outcomes. Methods: We matched 621 consumers whose index admission in 2014 was to a Prevention and Recovery Care ('PARCS consumers') with 621 similar consumers whose index admission in the same year was to an acute inpatient unit and who had no Prevention and Recovery Care stays for the study period ('inpatient-only consumers'). We used routinely collected data to compare them on a range of outcomes. Results: Prevention and Recovery Care Services consumers made less subsequent use of acute inpatient services and, on balance, incurred costs that were similar to or lower than inpatient-only consumers. They were also less likely to spend time on an involuntary treatment order following their index admission. Prevention and Recovery Care Services consumers also experienced positive clinical outcomes over the course of their index admission, but the magnitude of this improvement was not as great as for inpatient-only consumers. This type of clinical improvement is important for Prevention and Recovery Care Services, but they may place greater emphasis on personal recovery as an outcome. Conclusion: Prevention and Recovery Care Services can provide an alternative, less restrictive care option for eligible consumers who might otherwise be admitted to an acute inpatient unit and do so at no greater cost. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Depression is a highly prevalent and costly disorder. Effective treatments are available but are not always delivered to the right person at the right time, with both under- and over-treatment a problem. Up to half the patients presenting to general practice report symptoms of depression, but general practitioners have no systematic way of efficiently identifying level of need and allocating treatment accordingly. Therefore, our team developed a new clinical prediction tool (CPT) to assist with this task. The CPT predicts depressive symptom severity in three months' time and based on these scores classifies individuals into three groups (minimal/mild, moderate, severe), then provides a matched treatment recommendation. This study aims to test whether using the CPT reduces depressive symptoms at three months compared with usual care.Methods: The Target-D study is an individually randomized controlled trial. Participants will be 1320 general practice patients with depressive symptoms who will be approached in the practice waiting room by a research assistant and invited to complete eligibility screening on an iPad. Eligible patients will provide informed consent and complete the CPT on a purpose-built website. A computer-generated allocation sequence stratified by practice and depressive symptom severity group, will randomly assign participants to intervention (treatment recommendation matched to predicted depressive symptom severity group) or comparison (usual care plus Target-D attention control) arms. Follow-up assessments will be completed online at three and 12 months. The primary outcome is depressive symptom severity at three months. Secondary outcomes include anxiety, mental health self-efficacy, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. Intention-to-treat analyses will test for differences in outcome means between study arms overall and by depressive symptom severity group.Discussion: To our knowledge, this is the first depressive symptom stratification tool designed for primary care which takes a prognosis-based approach to provide a tailored treatment recommendation. If shown to be effective, this tool could be used to assist general practitioners to implement stepped mental-healthcare models and contribute to a more efficient and effective mental health system.Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR 12616000537459 ). Retrospectively registered on 27 April 2016. See Additional file 1 for trial registration data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The objectives of this study were to evaluate the efficacy of a health coaching (HC) intervention designed to prevent excessive gestational weight gain (GWG), and promote positive psychosocial and motivational outcomes in comparison with an Education Alone (EA) group.Design: Randomized-controlled trial.Methods: Two hundred and sixty-one women who were <18 weeks pregnant consented to take part. Those allocated to the HC group received a tailored HC intervention delivered by a Health Coach, whilst those in the EA group attended two education sessions. Women completed measures, including motivation, psychosocial variables, sleep quality, and knowledge, beliefs and expectations concerning GWG, at 15 weeks of gestation (Time 1) and 33 weeks of gestation (Time 2). Post-birth data were also collected at 2 months post-partum (Time 3).Results: There was no intervention effect in relation to weight gained during pregnancy, rate of excessive GWG or birth outcomes. The only differences between HC and EA women were higher readiness (b = 0.29, 95% CIs = 0.03-0.55, p < .05) and the importance to achieve a healthy GWG (b = 0.27, 95% CIs = 0.02-0.52, p < .05), improved sleep quality (b = -0.22, 95% CIs = -0.44 to -0.03, p < .05), and increased knowledge for an appropriate amount of GWG that would be best for their baby's health (b = -1.75, 95% CI = -3.26 to -0.24, p < .05) reported by the HC at Time 2.Conclusions: Whilst the HC intervention was not successful in preventing excessive GWG, several implications for the design of future GWG interventions were identified, including the burden of the intervention commitment and the use of weight monitoring.Statement Of Contribution: What is already known on the subject? Designing interventions to address gestational weight gain (GWG) continues to be a challenge. To date, health behaviour change factors have not been the focus of GWG interventions. What does this study add? Our health coaching (HC) intervention did not reduce GWG more so than education alone (EA). There was an intervention effect on readiness and importance to achieve healthy GWG. Yet there were no group differences regarding confidence to achieve healthy GWG post-intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]