Measuring the Effect of the Early assessment Team (MEET) for patients referred to outpatient mental health care: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Referrals to specialised mental health care (such as community mental health centres; CMHC) have increased over the last two decades. Patients often have multifaceted problems, which cannot only be solved by such care. Resources are limited, and triaging is challenging. A novel method which approaches patients early and individually upon referral to a CMHC-possibly with a brief intervention-is an Early assessment Team (EaT). In an EaT, two therapists meet the patient early in the process and seek to solve the present problem, often involving community services, primary health care, etc.; attention is paid to symptoms and functional strife, rather than diagnoses. This is in contrast to treatment as usual (TAU), where the patient (after being on a waiting list) meets one therapist, who focuses on history and situation to assign a diagnosis and eventually start a longitudinal treatment. The aim of this study is to describe and compare EaT and TAU regarding such outcomes as work and social adjustment, mental health, quality of life, use of health services, and patient satisfaction. The primary outcome is a change in perceived function from baseline to 12-month follow-up, measured by the Work and Social Adjustment Scale. METHOD: Patients (18 years and above; n = 588) referred to outpatient health care at a CMHC are randomised to EaT or TAU. Measures (patient self-reports and clinician reports, patients' records, and register data) are collected at baseline, after the first and last meeting, and at 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 months after inclusion. Some participants will be invited to participate in qualitative interviews. TRIAL DESIGN: The study is a single-centre, non-blinded, RCT with two conditions involving a longitudinal and mixed design (quantitative and qualitative data). DISCUSSION: This study will examine an intervention designed to determine early on which patients will benefit from parallel or other measures than assessment and treatment in CMHC and whether these will facilitate their recovery. Findings may potentially contribute to the development of the organisation of mental health services. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05087446. Registered on 21 October 2021.

Outcome and quality of life in patients operated on with radical cystectomy and three different urinary diversion techniques.

OBJECTIVE: To assess outcome and quality of life (QoL) aspects among patients treated with three different diversion techniques: Bricker, Studer or Hemi-Kock, after radical cystectomy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty-seven patients with Bricker conduit, 19 with Studer neobladder and 16 with Hemi-Kock neobladder answered a questionnaire concerning QoL, general health, relationship with partner, sexual function, satisfaction with information and follow-up, etc. Response rates were 79% (37/47), 100% (18/18) and 86% (19/22), in Bricker, Studer and Hemi-Kock patients respectively. Medical records were reviewed to assess cancer type, grade and stage. RESULTS: Both Studer and Bricker patients reported a high mean value of QoL (p>0.05). QoL was not influenced by tumour stage (pTa-T2 versus pT3-4) (p>0.05). After surgery, more Studer patients (78%) experienced practical problems compared with Bricker patients (40%) (p=0.01). Studer patients reported a higher influence on the everyday life compared with Bricker and Hemi-Kock patients (p<0.01 and p=0.05, respectively). Leakage in day-time was reported by 53% of Studer patients and 16% of Hemi-Kock patients (p=0.03). Moreover, all Studer patients had leakage at night compared with 58% of Hemi-Kock (p<0.01). The follow-up time after surgery was 56 months for Hemi-Kock patients compared with 26 months for Studer patients. Erectile dysfunction was reported by 81% of the men, with no difference between the methods of diversion. CONCLUSIONS: Patients in all diversion groups rated their QoL as high. Type of urinary diversion was not associated with any statistically significant difference in QoL outcome. However, Studer patients reported less favourable outcome regarding urinary continence compared with Hemi-Kock patients, probably owing to factors as shorter follow-up and surgical skill and experience. The results regarding urinary continence may explain why Studer patients reported more practical problems and a higher influence on their everyday life than Bricker and Hemi-Kock patients.