Testing the Integral Model of treatment motivation in outpatients with severe mental illness.

The current study tested the Integral Model of treatment motivation (IM) in a sample of 294 outpatients with severe mental illness, using structural equation modelling. The obtained structural model was not consistent with original theory, nor was the model invariant across time and patient groups (psychotic disorders and personality disorders). The patient's perceived suitability of treatment, perceived costs of treatment and outcome expectancy were most strongly associated with motivation and treatment engagement. The model explained between 22 and 86% of variance in clinical outcomes, depending on the timing of the assessment. Currently, the IM does not constitute a robust framework for patterns through which patients become motivated to engage in treatment, but does explain substantial amounts of variance in clinical outcomes. The future potential of IM as a basis for interventions in the mental health care is discussed, including suggestions for subsequent research and potential alterations of the IM to improve its utility for application in clinical practice.

The motivation paradox: higher psychosocial problem levels in severely mentally ill patients are associated with less motivation for treatment.

PURPOSE: Lack of motivation for treatment makes a subgroup of patients with severe mental illness (SMI) difficult to engage in psychiatric treatment. Such difficult-to-engage patients may also be the most in need of treatment. We hypothesized that the level of psychosocial problems would be inversely related to motivation for treatment. METHODS: Cross-sectional study in two independent samples. The first sample (n = 294) included SMI patients who participated in a randomized controlled trial and were assessed using the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) and self-rated and clinician-rated motivation-for-treatment scales. The second sample (n = 1,170) included SMI patients who were treated in Assertive Outreach Teams and were routinely assessed with the HoNOS and a motivation-for-treatment scale. In both samples, patients also self-rated their quality of life. RESULTS: In both samples, patients with HoNOS scores of 16 and higher had lower motivation scores on all motivation scales than patients with lower HoNOS scores, and also a lower quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: A motivation paradox seems inherent to this association between higher psychosocial problems levels, less motivation for treatment, and lower quality of life. Such a paradox has clinical relevance, as it may provide an ethical basis for outreach services which aim to engage marginally motivated SMI patients with severe psychosocial problems into mental health care.

Changes in motivation for treatment in precontemplating dually diagnosed patients receiving assertive community treatment.

In a population of dually diagnosed patients receiving assertive community treatment we used the theoretical framework of the transtheoretical model to establish (a) the proportions and characteristics of patients who were not motivated for treatment for psychiatric symptoms and substance use, (b) the proportion of patients who moved towards behavioral change after about 1 year, and examine how this change was related with clinical outcome; and (c) the sequence of change processes. Chi square tests and T tests were used to compare the patient characteristics and outcomes of patients who remained in precontemplation with those who progressed. During follow-up, 47 % of the patients came out of the precontemplation phase for treatment of psychiatric symptoms and 38 % for substance use behavior. Those who remained in precontemplation benefited less from treatment. Of those who did move forward, most appeared to become motivated for psychiatric treatment before becoming motivated to reduce substance use.