Evaluation of a mental health treatment court with assertive community treatment. Understanding team-based quality improvement for depression in primary care. A randomized trial of medical care management for community mental health settings: the Primary Care Access, Referral, and Evaluation (PCARE) study.
Without active engagement, many adults with serious mental illnesses remain untreated in the community and commit criminal offenses, resulting in their placement in the jails rather than mental health facilities. A mental health treatment court (MHTC) with an assertive community treatment (ACT) model of case management was developed through the cooperative efforts of the criminal justice and mental health systems. Participants were 235 adults with a serious mental illness who were booked into the county jail, and who volunteered for the study. An experimental design was used, with participants randomly assigned to MHTC or treatment as usual (TAU), consisting of adversarial criminal processing and less intensive mental health treatment. Results were reported for 6 and 12 month follow-up periods. Clients in both conditions improved in life satisfaction, distress, and independent living, while participants in the MHTC also showed reductions in substance abuse and new criminal activity. Outcomes are interpreted within the context of changes brought about in the community subsequent to implementation of the MHTC.
                Copyright 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. To assess the impacts of the characteristics of quality improvement (QI) teams and their environments on team success in designing and implementing high quality, enduring depression care improvement programs in primary care (PC) practices.
                Two nonprofit managed care organizations sponsored five QI teams tasked with improving care for depression in large PC practices. Data on characteristics of the teams and their environments is from observer process notes, national expert ratings, administrative data, and interviews.
                Comparative formative evaluation of the quality and duration of implementation of the depression improvement programs developed by Central Teams (CTs) emphasizing expert design and Local Teams (LTs) emphasizing participatory local clinician design, and of the effects of additional team and environmental factors on each type of team. Both types of teams depended upon local clinicians for implementation.
                The CT intervention program designs were more evidence-based than those of LTs. Expert team leadership, support from local practice management, and support from local mental health specialists strongly influenced the development of successful team programs. The CTs and LTs were equally successful when these conditions could be met, but CTs were more successful than LTs in less supportive environments.
                The LT approach to QI for depression requires high local support and expertise from primary care and mental health clinicians. The CT approach is more likely to succeed than the LT approach when local practice conditions are not optimal. Poor quality of healthcare contributes to impaired health and excess mortality in individuals with severe mental disorders. The authors tested a population-based medical care management intervention designed to improve primary medical care in community mental health settings.
                A total of 407 subjects with severe mental illness at an urban community mental health center were randomly assigned to either the medical care management intervention or usual care. For individuals in the intervention group, care managers provided communication and advocacy with medical providers, health education, and support in overcoming system-level fragmentation and barriers to primary medical care.
                At a 12-month follow-up evaluation, the intervention group received an average of 58.7% of recommended preventive services compared with a rate of 21.8% in the usual care group. They also received a significantly higher proportion of evidence-based services for cardiometabolic conditions (34.9% versus 27.7%) and were more likely to have a primary care provider (71.2% versus 51.9%). The intervention group showed significant improvement on the SF-36 mental component summary (8.0% [versus a 1.1% decline in the usual care group]) and a nonsignificant improvement on the SF-36 physical component summary. Among subjects with available laboratory data, scores on the Framingham Cardiovascular Risk Index were significantly better in the intervention group (6.9%) than the usual care group (9.8%).
                Medical care management was associated with significant improvements in the quality and outcomes of primary care. These findings suggest that care management is a promising approach for improving medical care for patients treated in community mental health settings.
Community mental health team management is not inferior to non-team standard care in any important respects and is superior in promoting greater acceptance of treatment. It may also be superior in reducing hospital admission and avoiding death by suicide. The evidence for CMHT based care is insubstantial considering the massive impact the drive toward community care has on patients, carers, clinicians and the community at large.