Randomised controlled trial of a theoretically grounded tailored intervention to diffuse evidence-based public health practice [ISRCTN23257060]. Randomized controlled trial of assertive community treatment in intellectual disability: the TACTILD study. Comparative effectiveness of three approaches to serving people with severe mental illness and substance abuse disorders.
Previous studies have shown that Norwegian public health physicians do not systematically and explicitly use scientific evidence in their practice. They work in an environment that does not encourage the integration of this information in decision-making. In this study we investigate whether a theoretically grounded tailored intervention to diffuse evidence-based public health practice increases the physicians' use of research information.
                148 self-selected public health physicians were randomised to an intervention group (n = 73) and a control group (n = 75). The intervention group received a multifaceted intervention while the control group received a letter declaring that they had access to library services. Baseline assessments before the intervention and post-testing immediately at the end of a 1.5-year intervention period were conducted. The intervention was theoretically based and consisted of a workshop in evidence-based public health, a newsletter, access to a specially designed information service, to relevant databases, and to an electronic discussion list. The main outcome measure was behaviour as measured by the use of research in different documents.
                The intervention did not demonstrate any evidence of effects on the objective behaviour outcomes. We found, however, a statistical significant difference between the two groups for both knowledge scores: Mean difference of 0.4 (95% CI: 0.2-0.6) in the score for knowledge about EBM-resources and mean difference of 0.2 (95% CI: 0.0-0.3) in the score for conceptual knowledge of importance for critical appraisal. There were no statistical significant differences in attitude-, self-efficacy-, decision-to-adopt- or job-satisfaction scales. There were no significant differences in Cochrane library searching after controlling for baseline values and characteristics.
                Though demonstrating effect on knowledge the study failed to provide support for the hypothesis that a theory-based multifaceted intervention targeted at identified barriers will change professional behaviour. There has been a policy shift away from hospital to community in the services of all those with psychiatric disorders, including those with intellectual disability (ID), in the last 50 years. This has been accompanied recently by the growth of assertive outreach services, but these have not been evaluated in ID services.
                In a randomized controlled trial we compared assertive outreach with 'standard' community care, using global assessment of function (GAF) as the primary outcome measure, and burden and quality of life as secondary measures.
                We recruited 30 patients, considerably less than expected; no significant differences were found between the primary and secondary outcomes in the two groups. The differences were so small that a Type II error was unlikely.
                Reasons for this lack of specific efficacy of the assertive approach are discussed and it is suggested that there is a blurring of the differences between standard and assertive approaches in practice. This study examines the rationale for and relative effectiveness of three intervention models for treating people with severe mental illness and substance abuse disorders: Twelve Step recovery, behavioral skills training, and intensive case management. Using clinical trial methods, 132 dually diagnosed clients were assigned to three service approaches. Changes in client psychosocial outcomes, and psychiatric and substance abuse symptomatology were tracked over a 24-month period. Differential effectiveness was evident, with clients in the behavioral skills group demonstrating the most positive and significant differences in psychosocial functioning and symptomatology, compared with the Twelve Step recovery approach. However, the case management intervention also resulted in several positive and important differences compared with the Twelve Step recovery approach. We also found significant changes over time, not only at 6 months but increasingly positive changes in psychosocial functioning at 12 and 18 months as well. These results underscore the need for clinical trials to further examine the relative cost effectiveness of treatment approaches for dually disordered clients and to incorporate means of assessing subgroup differences so that the interventions being tested can be further refined and targeted to a broad set of needs among the dually diagnosed.
Very little evidence exists that there is no difference in the effectiveness between different types of interventions and that brief interventions are not superior to assessment only or treatment as usual. No conclusion can be made because of the paucity of the data and the low quality of the retrieved studies.