Search

Importance: Although the importance of recovery-oriented care for people with severe mental illness (SMI) is widely acknowledged, essential elements such as personalization and involvement of significant others are not adequately implemented in practice.Objective:To determine whether using resource groups (RGs) within flexible assertive community treatment (FACT) has favorable effects on empowerment and recovery-related outcomes in people with SMI.Design, Setting, and Participants:This assessor-blind, multisite randomized clinical trial was conducted from September 1, 2017, to September 30, 2020, with follow-up at 9 and 18 months. A total of 158 participants aged 18 to 65 years meeting the criteria for SMI were randomly allocated to FACT plus RG vs FACT as usual (1:1) in 20 FACT teams throughout the Netherlands. Data were analyzed from September 1, 2020, to January 31, 2021. The study was prespecified in the trial protocol and data from the intent-to-treat population were analyzed.Interventions:In the FACT plus RG condition, patients chose members from their informal and formal networks to form an RG that meets quarterly to discuss self-formulated recovery goals. The RG was integrated into the multidisciplinary support provided by the FACT team. In the FACT as-usual condition, empowerment (defined as overcoming powerlessness and gaining control of one’s life) and involvement of significant others was also part of the provided care, but without the structure of the RG.Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome was self-reported empowerment, measured with the Netherlands Empowerment List.Results:A total of 158 participants with SMI (median age, 38 [median absolute deviation, 13] years; 93 men [58.9%]) were randomized to FACT plus RG (n = 80) or FACT as usual (n = 78) care. Intention-to-treat analyses showed that randomization to the RG condition was associated with a clinically significant increase in empowerment (Cohen d, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.21-0.86) and improved outcomes with small to medium effect sizes in terms of quality of life (Cohen d, 0.25; 95% CI, −0.07 to 0.56), personal recovery (Cohen d, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.06-0.69), quality of social contact (Cohen d, 0.24; 95% CI, −0.07 to 0.56), disability (Cohen d, 0.29; 95% CI, −0.03 to 0.60), general functioning (Cohen d, 0.30; 95% CI, −0.01 to 0.62), and social functioning (Cohen d, 0.28; 95% CI, −0.04 to 0.59). No differences between conditions were found regarding psychopathological symptoms, attachment, frequency of social contact, and employment. Compared with FACT as usual, participants who stayed with the assigned treatment in the RG condition were more satisfied with treatment at 9 (Cohen d = 0.45; t135 = −2.62; P = .009) and 18 (Cohen d = 0.41; t116 = −2.22; P = .02) months.Conclusions and Relevance:These findings show that working with RGs improves empowerment and other mental health outcomes in people with SMI who receive community-based mental health services. This method of network-oriented care empowers people with SMI within their own environment.Trial Registration:Netherlands Trial Register Identifier: NL6548

Objectives: Recovery and empowerment have evolved into key objectives in the treatment and care of people with severe mental illness (SMI), and interest has grown in the role of social relationships in recovery. This study is the first to explore whether attachment styles are related to levels of empowerment, and secondly, whether attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance are associated with lower empowerment levels, independently of quality and frequency of social contact. Design: We used a cross-sectional design. Methods: In a sample of 157 participants with SMI in outpatient care, associations between attachment (Revised Adult Attachment Scale), self-reported social functioning, and empowerment (Netherlands Empowerment List) were assessed. Results: Attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance were both associated with lower levels of empowerment. A stepwise multiple regression analysis showed that the prediction of empowerment was significantly improved by adding attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance to quality and frequency of social contact. Attachment anxiety, attachment avoidance, and quality of social contact were significant predictors; frequency of social contact was not. Conclusions: Although our design does not allow causal conclusions, our results highlight the importance of interpersonal processes and behaviours as routes to improving empowerment for people with SMI. A promising approach might thus consist of securing attachment bonds with significant others so that the self and the other are perceived as reliable resources. Our findings also feature the importance of reciprocity and equality in social relationships. Taken together, our study emphasizes the value of social, contextualized interventions in recovery work for people with SMI. Practitioner points: Working towards attachment safety in interpersonal relations may be important in recovery-oriented treatment and care for people with severe mental illness (SMI). Helping people with SMI to recognize and change how they tend to relate themselves to others may promote engagement and effectiveness of recovery-oriented treatment and care. Reciprocity and equality in social relationships as vital complements to the more one-sided nature of ‘standing alongside’ and offering support may be important requisites for empowerment.

Background The resource group method provides a structure to facilitate patients’ empowerment and recovery processes, and to systematically engage significant others in treatment and care. A patient chooses members of a resource group (RG) that will work together on fulfilling patients’ recovery plan. By adopting shared decision-making processes and stimulating collaboration of different support systems, a broad and continuous support of patients’ chosen goals and wishes is preserved and problem solving and communication skills of the RG members are addressed. Objective The objectives of this study are (1) to establish the effectiveness of the RG method in increasing empowerment in patients with severe mental illnesses (SMI) in the Netherlands; (2) to investigate the cost-effectiveness and cost utility of the RG method; and (3) to qualitatively explore its dynamics and processes. Methods/design This multisite randomized controlled trial will compare the effects of the RG-method integrated in Flexible Assertive Community Treatment (FACT) (90 patients) with those of standard FACT (90 patients). Baseline assessments and 9-month and 18-month follow-up assessments will be conducted in face-to-face home visits. The primary outcome measure, empowerment, will be assessed using the Netherlands Empowerment List (NEL). The secondary outcomes will be quality of life (MANSA); personal, community and clinical recovery (I.ROC); general, social and community functioning (WHODAS 2.0); general psychopathological signs and symptoms (BSI-18); and societal costs (TiC-P). An economic evaluation of the cost-effectiveness and cost utility of the RG method will also be conducted. A qualitative multiple case-study will be added to collect patients’, RG members’ and professionals’ perspectives by in-depth interviews, observations and focus groups. Discussion This trial will be the first to study the effects of the RG method on empowerment in patients with SMI. By combining clinical-effectiveness data with an economic evaluation and in-depth qualitative information from primary stakeholders, it will provide a detailed overview of the RG method as a mean of improving care for patients with SMI. Trial registration The study has been registered in the Dutch Trial Register, identifier: NTR6737, September 2017.