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]

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]