Addressing victimization to enable societal participation in flexible assertive community treatment: A process evaluation of the implementation of a new intervention.

Background: Individuals with severe mental illness experience more victimization and discrimination than other persons in the community. Effective rehabilitation and recovery-oriented care interventions aimed at addressing this issue are lacking. We therefore developed a victimization-informed intervention (accompanied by a training module for professionals) called the Victoria intervention. The purpose of the present study was to understand the trial effects by examining the implementation process and the factors that influenced it. Materials and methods: A process evaluation was conducted using a mixed-methods design. During the professionals' intervision sessions, we used observations to understand the learning processes (n = 25). Subsequently, we studied the use of the intervention in practice through structured questionnaires (n = 215) and semi-structured interviews (n = 34) with clients and professionals. We used descriptive and inferential statistics for the quantitative data and the framework method for the analyses of the qualitative data. Results: The observations showed that the trainings were well received. The professionals shared the urgency of paying attention to victimization and discrimination and its harmful effects on participation. They also found the intervention steps to be logical and the intervention protocol easy to use. Nevertheless, they mentioned in the interviews that they had experienced difficulties initiating a conversation about victimization, and if they started one, they did not always follow the steps of the intervention as intended. Few clients said that victimization was placed on the agenda, though those who had discussed victimization with their caregivers expressed their appreciation in the interviews; they felt acknowledged and supported. Discussion: The findings indicate that the intervention was considered helpful in raising awareness and the acknowledgment of victimization. However, professionals remain reluctant to talk about the subject, and the results show they need more practical training in this regard. This process evaluation has an important added value in that it helps us to understand the results of the effect evaluation of the intervention. The findings will facilitate the development and implementation of interventions that address clients' victimization experiences in community mental healthcare settings and subsequently enable their participation in society.

Professionals' Perception of the Needs of Female Victims of Intimate Partner Violence: A Vignette Study.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) has a high prevalence and serious consequences for the wellbeing of the victims. The impact of partner violence and the behavior of female victims continue to be poorly understood. Recently, a number of reviews have enhanced the understanding of the needs of female victims of IPV. These reviews improve the evidence base relating to IPV needs assessment and can enhance effectiveness of service provision. The aim of the current study is to review the currency of the knowledge used by social workers working with victims of IPV. We used a qualitative design in which 23 social workers from 10 IPV teams were asked to react to vignettes. Participants were asked what they perceived to be essential for understanding the women's needs and determining an accurate treatment and guidance plan. Data were analyzed using open coding, followed by thematic analysis. Results indicate that in health services planning for battered women, service providers ask about the right domains, including: the characteristics of the relationship, social context, nature and pattern of abuse, characteristics of the female client, and-although to in a lesser degree-characteristics of the partner. Unfortunately, the sub themes within these domains are only partially considered, and sometimes superficially considered. Some topics that were not determined in the literature as relevant needs factors were seen as important by social workers, or assessed too soon, including the stay or leave question. These findings underline the realistic risk that staff members miss the actual reasons women stay with their partners or make certain choices in their help-seeking behavior. Incorrect needs assessments enhance the risk of female victims feeling unheard, and ineffective service provision, leading to care avoidance and low compliance with the services provided.

Intervention to prevent and manage the effects of victimization related to social participation for people with severe mental illness: Results from a cluster randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Individuals with severe mental illness often face (anticipated) discrimination and (criminal) victimization, which have severe consequences for their social participation. The aim of the present study is to assess the effectiveness of a new intervention to manage and prevent revictimization, and to support safe participation by recognizing and acknowledging the impact of their victimization experiences. METHOD: A multicenter cluster randomized controlled trial was performed by following clients from four intervention teams and four teams providing care as usual. The primary outcomes were social participation, victimization, and discrimination. The secondary outcomes were acknowledgment of difficulties, self-efficacy and empowerment, quality of life, and psychosocial functioning. Data were collected at baseline, and after 10- and 20-month follow-ups. The data were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle using linear mixed models and generalized estimating equations. In total, 400 clients were included in the analyses: 216 in the intervention group and 184 in the control group. RESULTS: For experienced discrimination and acknowledgment of difficulties and recovery support, we found small but significant time by condition interactions after 20 months. Both experienced and anticipated discrimination, and self-efficacy increased slightly in both groups. No significant differences were found for other outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The intervention had no effect on victimization and participation, but there were indications that it was successful in moderating experienced discrimination. The clients also felt significantly more acknowledged and supported in their recovery process. Further development of the intervention is needed, and future research should focus on improving implementation. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Victimisation of individuals with serious mental illness living in sheltered housing: differential impact of risk factors related to clinical and demographic characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Sheltered housing is associated with quality-of-life improvements for individuals with serious mental illness (SMI). However, there are equivocal findings around safety outcomes related to this type of living condition. AIMS: We aimed to investigate raw differences in prevalence and incidence of crime victimisation in sheltered housing compared with living alone or with family; and to identify groups at high risk for victimisation, using demographic and clinical factors. We do so by reporting estimated victimisation incidents for each risk group. METHOD: A large, community-based, cross-sectional survey of 956 people with SMI completed the Dutch Crime and Victimisation Survey. Data was collected on victimisation prevalence and number of incidents in the past year. RESULTS: Victimisation prevalence was highest among residents in sheltered housing (50.8%) compared with persons living alone (43%) or with family (37.8%). We found that sheltered housing was associated with increased raw victimisation incidence (incidence rate ratio: 2.80, 95% CI 2.36-3.34 compared with living with family; 1.87, 95% CI 1.59-2.20 compared with living alone). Incidence was especially high for some high-risk groups, including men, people with comorbid post-traumatic stress disorder and those with high levels of education. However, women reported less victimisation in sheltered housing than living alone or with family, if they also reported drug or alcohol use. CONCLUSIONS: The high prevalence and incidence of victimisation among residents in sheltered housing highlights the need for more awareness and surveillance of victimisation in this population group, to better facilitate a recovery-enabling environment for residents with SMI.

Development of an Intervention Aimed at Increasing Awareness and Acknowledgement of Victimisation and Its Consequences Among People with Severe Mental Illness.

Individuals with severe mental illness have a significant risk of (anticipated) discrimination and (criminal) victimisation, which is not structurally and systematically addressed by mental health practitioners. The aim of this study was to develop and pilot an intervention which supports professionals to address victimisation and its consequences, in order to reinforce safe social participation and improve recovery. Following the rehabilitation and positive risk management literature, in addition to current practice, intervention components were developed in two focus groups and four subsequent expert meetings. The intervention was piloted in two outpatient teams before being finalised. The Victoria intervention includes positive risk management, focusing on clients' narratives and strengths, and awareness of unsafe (home) environments: it comprises four steps: exploring issues with social participation, analysing victimisation experiences, clarifying the context of these experiences, and determining future steps, including victimisation-sensitive rehabilitation planning and optional trauma treatment. Future research should further test this intervention.

Profiling of victimization, perpetration, and participation: A latent class analysis among people with severe mental illness.

BACKGROUND: Persons with severe mental illness are more prone to victimization and experience more difficulties regarding societal participation than other community members. These experiences vary greatly among individuals. Community mental health care should offer more individualized support by addressing these differences in experience. Therefore, this study aimed to identify subgroups of outpatients with severe mental illness based on their experiences of social participation and victimization. METHODS: Data from patients with severe mental illness from eight outpatient teams in the Netherlands were used to perform latent class analysis. From the total caseload, 395 patients agreed to participate. Classes were based on: i) criminal victimization incidents, ii) criminal perpetration incidents (Dutch Safety Monitor), iii) experienced discrimination (DISC-12), and iv) social functioning (Social Functioning Scale). Also, to investigate differences between the classes, socio-demographic, clinical, and person-related variables were examined. RESULTS: Three classes were identified. The Victimized and Perpetrating class (34.4%) had the highest prevalence of discrimination, victimization, and perpetration, and intermediate scores on social functioning subscales. This class also experienced the most problems in other domains, such as psychosocial functioning and quality of life. The Discriminated and Avoiding class (36.4%) had moderate scores for discrimination, victimization and perpetration, and the lowest scores for social functioning and social support. The General Difficulties class (28.8%) had the lowest prevalence of discrimination, victimization, and perpetration, and the highest scores on social functioning. DISCUSSION: These distinct classes offer new insights to mental health professionals in outpatient teams in in their aim to positively influence the patient's social context during rehabilitation; this includes addressing the role of victimization, and indicates the relevance of distinctive approaches and the support needed for each class. Professionals may need to focus more on the impact of difficulties in their patients' social context to adequately support them in the rehabilitation process.

Effectiveness of an intervention for managing victimization risks related to societal participation for persons with severe mental illness: a cluster RCT study protocol.

BACKGROUND: People with severe mental illness (SMI) are more likely to experience criminal victimization than other community members. In addition, (self-) stigma and perceived discrimination are highly prevalent in this group. These adversities in the social context often have major adverse effects on the rehabilitation and recovery of these persons. Current practice, however, lacks instruments to address these issues. As a reaction, the Victoria intervention was developed and pilot-tested with client representatives, professionals, trainers and researchers. The Victoria intervention is a method for community mental health care workers to expand their awareness of this topic and support them in assessing victimization and incorporate appropriate services, including trauma screening and rehabilitation services, in their health care planning. For clients, the Victoria intervention aims to increase their awareness, active management of possible victimization risks and promote safe social participation. As a new intervention, little is known about its use in real practice and its effects on client outcomes. METHODS/DESIGN: To determine the feasibility and effectiveness of this intervention, a process evaluation and a first cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) will be carried out. Outpatients from eight Flexible Assertive Community Treatment (F-ACT) teams from two mental health care (MHC) organizations in the Netherlands are included in the study. Teams in the intervention group will receive three half-day training sessions, and bi-monthly supervision meetings for 18 months. Teams in the control group provide care as usual. For the process evaluation, a multi-method design is used. To assess effects on client outcomes, clients will be interviewed about their experiences on victimization and societal participation using validated questionnaires at baseline, and after 9 and 18 months. DISCUSSION: This study is the first to evaluate an intervention aiming at recognition of victimization, (self-) stigma and perceived discrimination, and targeting outpatients' insights into possible risks and coping skills to tackle these risks to enhance safe societal participation. Results of this study may validate the Victoria intervention as a practice to better manage risk for adversities related to societal participation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register (NTR): 5585 , date of registration: 11-01-2016.

Identifying profiles of service users in housing services and exploring their quality of life and care needs.

BACKGROUND: Housing services aim to support people with mental illness in their daily life and recovery. As the level of recovery differs between service users, the quality of life and care needs also might vary. However, the type and amount of care and support that service users receive do not always match their recovery. In order to improve the quality of care, this study aims to explore whether subgroups of service users exist based on three dimensions of recovery and to examine and compare the quality of life and care needs of the persons in these subgroups. METHODS: Latent class analysis was performed with data from 263 service users of housing services in the Netherlands. Classes were based on three variables: personal recovery (Mental Health Recovery Measure), social recovery (Social Functioning Scale), and clinical recovery (Brief Symptom Inventory). Subsequently, the quality of life (MANSA) and care needs (CANSAS) of the different classes were analysed by the use of descriptive and inferential statistics. RESULTS: Three classes could be distinguished. Class 1 (45%) comprised of people who score the highest of the three classes in terms of personal and social recovery and who experience the least number of symptoms. People in class 2 (44%) and class 3 (11%) score significantly lower on personal and social recovery, and they experience significantly more symptoms compared to class 1. The distinction between class 2 and 3 can be made on the significantly higher number of symptoms in class 3. All three classes differ significantly on quality of life and unmet needs. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of life of service users of housing services needs improvement, as even persons in the best-recovered subgroup have a lower quality of life than the average population. Workers of housing services need to be aware of the recovery of a client and what his or her individual needs and goals are. Furthermore, better care (allocation) concerning mental and physical health and rehabilitation is needed. Care should be provided on all dimensions of recovery at the same time, therefore mental health care organisations should work together and integrate their services. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN77355880 retrospectively registered 05/07/2013.

Effectiveness of the Comprehensive Approach to Rehabilitation (CARe) methodology: design of a cluster randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: There is an increasing amount of evidence for the effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions for people with severe mental illness (SMI). In the Netherlands, a rehabilitation methodology that is well known and often applied is the Comprehensive Approach to Rehabilitation (CARe) methodology. The overall goal of the CARe methodology is to improve the client's quality of life by supporting the client in realizing his/her goals and wishes, handling his/her vulnerability and improving the quality of his/her social environment. The methodology is strongly influenced by the concept of 'personal recovery' and the 'strengths case management model'. No controlled effect studies have been conducted hitherto regarding the CARe methodology. METHODS/DESIGN: This study is a two-armed cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) that will be executed in teams from three organizations for sheltered and supported housing, which provide services to people with long-term severe mental illness. Teams in the intervention group will receive the multiple-day CARe methodology training from a specialized institute and start working according the CARe Methodology guideline. Teams in the control group will continue working in their usual way. Standardized questionnaires will be completed at baseline (T0), and 10 (T1) and 20 months (T2) post baseline. Primary outcomes are recovery, social functioning and quality of life. The model fidelity of the CARe methodology will be assessed at T1 and T2. DISCUSSION: This study is the first controlled effect study on the CARe methodology and one of the few RCTs on a broad rehabilitation method or strength-based approach. This study is relevant because mental health care organizations have become increasingly interested in recovery and rehabilitation-oriented care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial registration number is ISRCTN77355880 .

Effects of interferential care: a community-based care program for persons with severe problems on several life areas.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Interferential care differs from the current community-based care programs in that it targets a larger, heterogeneous group and combines brokerage and full service elements in a multi-organizational care team. The team provides all the services itself, but with the aim to prepare clients within a few months for referral to regular (ambulant) healthcare services. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of interferential care. METHODS: In a multisite, pretest-posttest design, 523 patients of three interferential care teams were followed. Quality of life, problem severity, problems with referral and engagement were assessed at baseline, at referral and again after 6 months. Analyses were performed using linear mixed modeling. RESULTS: Interferential care showed moderate to strong effects on quality of life and problem severity. These effects persisted (quality of life) or further improved (problem severity) until follow-up 6 months after referral to regular services. There were also small effects on both engagement and problems with referral. CONCLUSION: Interferential care offers significant improvements in quality of life and problem severity in persons who have severe problems on several life areas and who are currently not reached by healthcare services. It is a promising community-based care program for healthcare systems in which regular care already contains many elements of home-based practice.

European approach to assertive outreach for substance users: assessment of program components.

Model programs for assertive outreach for substance users (an active and persistent type of community-based health care) are still in their infancy. Most programs were formulated in the United States, and one problem is the lack of feasible and effective models for application in Europe. Therefore, in 2003 all assertive outreach programs for substance users in The Netherlands (n = 277) received a questionnaire about their main program components. The programs were found to differ in case-finding methods, label, focus, corporate strategy, care package, and team structure. The only association found was between the program strategy (referral or long-term care) and the program focus (nuisance reduction or care). Contextual and practical reasons for the differences between the programs are discussed as well as the implications for practice and future studies.