Use of psychiatric emergency services and enrollment status in a public managed mental health care plan.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of acute-care psychiatric patients who visited the emergency department at a large public hospital in terms of the patients' enrollment status in the region's public managed mental health care plan. The results of the analyses were expected to provide information about the degree and types of access to care for individuals who are and are not enrolled in the plan. METHODS: Data were collected over a seven-month period for 2,419 patients who visited a large, inner-city crisis triage unit. Patients were grouped according to whether they were currently enrolled, previously enrolled, or never enrolled in the public managed mental health care plan. Univariate and logistic regression models were used to determine differences between the three groups. RESULTS: In general, patients who were currently enrolled in the plan had a higher rate of functional psychosis, past use of psychiatric services, and functional disability and lower rates of substance use and homelessness. Previously enrolled patients had a more moderate rate of psychosis but a higher rate of substance use, functional disability, and homelessness. The never-enrolled patients had a lower rate of psychosis, functional disability, and past use of psychiatric services, and moderate substance use. CONCLUSIONS: The region's public health plan appeared to be succeeding in engaging and keeping the most psychiatrically impaired patients in treatment; however, individuals with moderate psychiatric symptoms and high levels of substance abuse may never have been enrolled in the plan because of Medicaid ineligibility or because they dropped out of treatment. Problematic behavior and history of hospitalization were the best predictors of enrollment status.

A brief medical necessity scale for mental disorders: reliability, validity, and clinical utility.

Managed care organizations (MCOs) use the concept of "medical necessity" to decide whether a prescribed treatment is warranted for a given medical condition. Because mental disorders lack the objective disease criteria common to medical illness, behavioral health administrators need a validated means to identify and quantify the severity of "medically important" aspects of mental disorders. The authors developed and tested a brief medical necessity scale for mental disorders in 205 patients presenting for initial evaluation. The scale had a factor structure with four subscales; good internal consistency, interrater reliability, and concurrent and predictive validity; and modest ability to identify patients requiring hospitalization and, in hospitalized patients, those requiring involuntary hospitalization. The authors propose use of the scale to better clarify decisions about level of care assignments and to better assess patient characteristics predictive of good outcome.

Psychiatric status, quality of life, and level of care as predictors of outcomes of acute inpatient treatment.

OBJECTIVE: The study examined the role of five types of variables--demographic characteristics, psychiatric status, functional quality of life, satisfaction with quality of life, and level of care--in predicting key outcomes of inpatient treatment. METHODS: Multivariate canonical regression and univariate multiple regression models were constructed using data from 1,053 inpatients at a public hospital in Washington State. The models were used to predict length of stay, change in symptom severity during hospitalization, psychiatrists' ratings of patients' insight into their illness at discharge, patients' global satisfaction with life, and rehospitalization within 18 months. Hierarchical stepwise procedures were used to select variables that were significant predictors of outcomes. RESULTS: All five classes of predictors were related to the outcomes. The roles of demographic characteristics and diagnoses were minimal. Previous hospitalization and severity of symptoms at admission were strong predictors of psychiatric status. Indicators of functional quality of life and satisfaction with quality of life explained significant variance in all models after accounting for the other classes of predictors. Frequency of family visits was the strongest functional quality-of-life predictor, relating to positive outcomes. Pretreatment satisfaction with life was a significant predictor of most outcomes, and increased satisfaction was associated with positive outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' quality of life before psychiatric inpatient treatment predicted treatment outcomes independently of psychiatric status, demographic characteristics, and level-of-care variables. Prospective studies are needed to predict outcomes using multidimensional constructs.

The relationship of patient-administered outcome assessments to quality of life and physician ratings: validity of the BASIS-32.

The reliability and validity of a patient-administered version of the Behavior and Symptom Identification Scale (BASIS-32) was compared to the original interviewer-administered version. The construct validity of BASIS-32 subscales was assessed by examining their relationship with functional and satisfaction quality of life and physician ratings of functional and clinical status. A total of 361 acute psychiatric inpatients were given a self-administered BASIS-32, nurse-administered Lehman's Quality of Life Interview (QOLI), and Psychiatrist Assessment Form at admission and discharge. The original factor structure, internal consistency reliability, discriminant validity, and sensitivity to change were replicated. The patient-administered BASIS-32 is equally as reliable and valid as the interview. Construct validity analyses revealed that functional and satisfaction QOLI indices were moderately related to the BASIS-32 in the hypothesized directions. All satisfaction scales were associated with significantly less severity. Physician ratings were only mildly related to the subscales. The BASIS-32 used in outcome assessments with inpatients provides important and unique perspectives on functional and clinical status that are not tapped by clinician-rated assessments.

Longitudinal assessment of quality of life in acute psychiatric inpatients: reliability and validity.

This study examined the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of Lehman's Quality of Life Interview (QOLI) as an outcome measure on 981 acutely ill psychiatric inpatients assessed longitudinally at admission and discharge. Patients were stratified into five diagnostic (DX) (depressed bipolar, depressed unipolar, schizophrenia, mania, and other diagnoses) and two substance use disorder (SA) strata (with and without concurrent substance abuse/dependence) based on DSM-III-R criteria. There was good replication of the factor structure, excellent internal consistency, overall and within DX and SA groups. Intercorrelations showed that the functional and satisfaction indices measure unique aspects of the quality of life. The construct consistency of the QOLI was dependent upon psychiatric diagnosis and life domain. Intercorrelations of functional and satisfaction indices for patients with depression were greater than for manic patients. We demonstrated strong consistency of construct validity for family and social relation domains, but not safety or leisure activities. Construct validity was shown to hold longitudinally. Analyses of DX and SA group differences on satisfaction and functional indices of the 8 life domains supported discriminative validity: Depressed patients reported the most dissatisfaction, followed by schizophrenic patients, and manic patients reported the greatest satisfaction in most life domains. Patients with concurrent substance abuse generally reported less satisfaction and lower quality of life than patients without a dual diagnosis. Examination of longitudinal changes in satisfaction indicated the QOLI is responsive to changes in global life, leisure activities, living situation, and social relations from hospital admission to discharge (an average of 2 weeks). This study supports the use of the QOLI as an outcome measure to assess quality of life in acutely ill hospitalized psychiatric patients.

Evidence for limited validity of the revised global assessment of functioning scale.

The study examined the concurrent validity of the revised Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scale, which is highly similar to the Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale (SOFAS) in DSM-IV and which is designed to measure patients' functioning and not their clinical symptoms. Psychiatrists used the revised GAF to rate 337 psychiatric inpatients; the ratings were compared with nurses' ratings of the same sample using Lehman's Quality of Life Scale. Ratings on the revised GAF were most strongly correlated with ratings of clinical symptoms, not functioning. Reliance on the GAF as the only tool to assess patients' functioning may be problematic.

A psychiatrist-rated battery of measures for assessing the clinical status of psychiatric inpatients.

Despite the increasing demand for outcome assessment measures, no published reports have provided a standardized way to assess psychiatric inpatients that includes diagnosis and observer ratings of psychopathology. This paper reviews general principles for selecting outcome assessment measures, proposes a battery of instruments based on already available measures to assess clinical status in psychiatric inpatients, reviews methods of implementing the battery in an academic inpatient psychiatric setting, and presents preliminary data on its interrater reliability, construct validity, and range of response to acute hospitalization. Preliminary results suggest that the battery may be useful for resident and medical student education and for enhancing quality assurance and continuous quality improvement.

Pragmatic issues in design and implementation of a psychotherapy outcome study.

Studies of the outcome of psychotherapy are becoming an important part of health policy development, cost control, and program evaluation. The authors describe steps in the design and implementation of an outcome study, including the selection of measurement instruments, the role of human subject review boards, the cost of the study and the desirability of computerization, the time frame for collecting data, and methods of keeping track of the data. They emphasize the importance of staff cooperation and discuss ways it can be fostered. They also stress the need for periodic reviews and identify issues that should be addressed in such reviews to keep the study on course.