Cultural and linguistic adaptability of the Rorschach Performance Assessment System as a measure of psychotic characteristics and severity of mental disturbance in Taiwan.

This study investigated the cultural and linguistic adaptability of the Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS), a new Rorschach administration, scoring, and interpretation system that minimizes psychometric weaknesses of the Comprehensive System (CS). This investigation addressed the validity of R-PAS measures of psychotic characteristics and psychopathology severity in Taiwan, including the incremental validity of the R-PAS relative to the CS variables measuring the same constructs. Ninety Taiwanese individuals (75 psychiatric patients and 15 nonpatients) were tested with standard R-PAS administration and scoring. Two non-Rorschach severity of disturbance measures and 2 psychosis measures served as independent criterion measures. The R-PAS measures were found to be valid in Taiwan in assessing psychotic symptoms and psychopathology severity, thus demonstrating cultural and linguistic adaptability. Moreover, hierarchical regression analyses demonstrated incremental validity for the R-PAS variables over their CS counterparts, providing support that the R-PAS revisions enhance the test psychometrically. These research findings also demonstrate the viability of the R-PAS as a Rorschach system that can be effectively employed outside the U.S. in a different language and culture.

A randomized study comparing the treatment environment in alternative and hospital-based acute psychiatric care.

OBJECTIVE: Programs that offer alternatives to hospital-based acute psychiatric care have reported promising results of lower costs, equivalent or superior outcomes, and greater patient satisfaction. This study supplements previous research that compared the outcomes, satisfaction, and cost of hospital-based care and one such alternative program, short-term acute residential treatment (START), with an analysis of patient and staff perceptions of the treatment environments. METHODS: Patients who participated were all veterans and were randomly assigned to receive treatment in a hospital psychiatric unit (N=45) or in START (N=48). Both groups completed the Ward Atmosphere Scale (WAS), a standardized measure of treatment environment, at the time of discharge. During the study, staff members from both types of programs also completed the WAS (15 hospital staff and 75 START staff). RESULTS: Both patients and staff rated the START environment more favorably than the hospital environment on five of ten WAS subscales. No differences were found in congruence between staff and participants' scores at START or the hospital. WAS profiles for patients and staff from the hospital closely matched published national norms for hospitals, whereas WAS profiles for patients and staff from START more closely resembled treatment environments recommended for the most disturbed patients (lower levels of anger and aggression and higher levels of support, problem orientation, and order and organization). CONCLUSIONS: The more favorable ratings of the treatment environment at START in this study are consistent with previously published findings demonstrating the viability of the START model as an alternative to hospital-based acute psychiatric care.

A randomized trial of short-term acute residential treatment for veterans.

OBJECTIVE: A variety of alternatives to acute psychiatric hospital care have been developed over the past several decades. including San Diego's short-term acute residential treatment (START) program, now comprising a certified and accredited network of six facilities with a total of 75 beds. This study compared outcomes, patient satisfaction, and episode costs for a sample of 99 veterans who received acute care either at an inpatient unit at a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) hospital or at a START facility. METHODS: Consenting participants were randomly assigned to one of the two treatment settings. Follow-up was conducted at two months. During the follow-up period, participants received treatment as usual. Multiple standardized measures were used to maximize validity in assessing symptoms, functioning, and quality of life. RESULTS: Participants who were treated in either a hospital or the START program showed significant improvement between admission, discharge, and two-month follow-up, with few statistically significant differences between the groups in symptoms and functioning. There was some evidence that START participants had greater satisfaction with services. Mean costs for the index episode were significantly lower for START participants (65 percent lower) than for those who were treated in the hospital. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that the START model provides effective voluntary acute psychiatric care in a non-hospital-based setting at considerably lower cost. Efforts to replicate and evaluate the model at additional locations merit attention.