Evaluating Open Dialogue in Italian mental health services: evidence from a multisite prospective cohort study.

Objective: This longitudinal study aimed to quantitatively document and evaluate the implementation and outcomes of the Open Dialogue (OD) approach within Italian Mental Health Departments (MHDs), focusing on the ratings of OD-network meetings by patients and their families and assessing the clinical outcomes over a span of 12 months. Results: Over the course of the study, 58 patients participated in 517 OD-network meetings, demonstrating a high level of satisfaction with the care received, as evidenced by the Session Rating Scale (SRS) and Outcome Rating Scale (ORS). Clinically, significant improvements were observed in the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF), Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (CORE-OM), and the Lubben Social Network Scale (LSNS), indicating enhanced psychological and social functioning. The SRS scores showed that satisfaction with the meetings increased over time, while the ORS indicated that both patients and their social networks perceived gradual improvements throughout the therapy. Conclusion: The OD approach within Italian MHDs was successfully implemented and well-received by patients and their social networks, yielding significant clinical improvements. These findings suggest the feasibility and effectiveness of integrating the OD model into the Italian public mental health system, supporting its potential for broader application in diverse healthcare settings. The study highlights the importance of continuous engagement and evaluation to maintain high standards of practice and suggests that OD can be a valuable addition to existing mental health care practices, promoting recovery through inclusive, dialogue-based interventions.

Quality of care and its determinants in longer term mental health facilities across Europe; a cross-sectional analysis.

BACKGROUND: The Quality Indicator for Rehabilitative Care (QuIRC) is an international, standardised quality tool for the evaluation of mental health facilities that provide longer term care. Completed by the service manager, it comprises 145 items that assess seven domains of care: living environment; treatments and interventions; therapeutic environment; self-management and autonomy; social interface; human rights; and recovery based practice. We used the QuIRC to investigate associations between characteristics of longer term mental health facilities across Europe and the quality of care they delivered to service patients. METHODS: QuIRC assessments were completed for 213 longer term mental health units in ten countries that were at various stages of deinstitutionalisation of their mental health services. Associations between QuIRC domain scores and unit descriptive variables were explored using simple and multiple linear regression that took into account clustering at the unit and country level. RESULTS: We found wide variation in QuIRC domain scores between individual units, but across countries, fewer than a quarter scored below 50 % on any domains. The quality of care was higher in units that were smaller, of mixed sex, that had a defined expected maximum length of stay and in which not all patients were severely disabled. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first time longer term mental health units across a number of European countries have been compared using a standardised measure. Further use of the QuIRC will allow greater understanding of the quality of care in these units across Europe and provide an opportunity to monitor pan-European quality standards of care for this vulnerable patient group.

Quality of longer term mental health facilities in Europe: validation of the quality indicator for rehabilitative care against service users' views.

BACKGROUND: The Quality Indicator for Rehabilitative Care (QuIRC) is a staff rated, international toolkit that assesses care in longer term hospital and community based mental health facilities. The QuIRC was developed from review of the international literature, an international Delphi exercise with over 400 service users, practitioners, carers and advocates from ten European countries at different stages of deinstitutionalisation, and review of the care standards in these countries. It can be completed in under an hour by the facility manager and has robust content validity, acceptability and inter-rater reliability. In this study, we investigated the internal validity of the QuIRC. Our aim was to identify the QuIRC domains of care that independently predicted better service user experiences of care. METHOD: At least 20 units providing longer term care for adults with severe mental illness were recruited in each of ten European countries. Service users completed standardised measures of their experiences of care, quality of life, autonomy and the unit's therapeutic milieu. Unit managers completed the QuIRC. Multilevel modelling allowed analysis of associations between service user ratings as dependent variables with unit QuIRC domain ratings as independent variables. RESULTS: 1750/2495 (70%) users and the managers of 213 units from across ten European countries participated. QuIRC ratings were positively associated with service users' autonomy and experiences of care. Associations between QuIRC ratings and service users' ratings of their quality of life and the unit's therapeutic milieu were explained by service user characteristics (age, diagnosis and functioning). A hypothetical 10% increase in QuIRC rating resulted in a clinically meaningful improvement in autonomy. CONCLUSIONS: Ratings of the quality of longer term mental health facilities made by service managers were positively associated with service users' autonomy and experiences of care. Interventions that improve quality of care in these settings may promote service users' autonomy.

The development of the Quality Indicator for Rehabilitative Care (QuIRC): a measure of best practice for facilities for people with longer term mental health problems.

BACKGROUND: Despite the progress over recent decades in developing community mental health services internationally, many people still receive treatment and care in institutional settings. Those most likely to reside longest in these facilities have the most complex mental health problems and are at most risk of potential abuses of care and exploitation. This study aimed to develop an international, standardised toolkit to assess the quality of care in longer term hospital and community based mental health units, including the degree to which human rights, social inclusion and autonomy are promoted. METHOD: The domains of care included in the toolkit were identified from a systematic literature review, international expert Delphi exercise, and review of care standards in ten European countries. The draft toolkit comprised 154 questions for unit managers. Inter-rater reliability was tested in 202 units across ten countries at different stages of deinstitutionalisation and development of community mental health services. Exploratory factor analysis was used to corroborate the allocation of items to domains. Feedback from those using the toolkit was collected about its usefulness and ease of completion. RESULTS: The toolkit had excellent inter-rater reliability and few items with narrow spread of response. Unit managers found the content highly relevant and were able to complete it in around 90 minutes. Minimal refinement was required and the final version comprised 145 questions assessing seven domains of care. CONCLUSIONS: Triangulation of qualitative and quantitative evidence directed the development of a robust and comprehensive international quality assessment toolkit for units in highly variable socioeconomic and political contexts.