Intentions and experiences of effective practice in mental health specific supported accommodation services: a qualitative interview study

Support in Daily Living for Young Adults with Neurodevelopmental Conditions in Sweden: A Qualitative Description of Current Practice

In Sweden, people living independently and requiring daily living support can access 'housing support', a form of practical, educational, and social support provided by the municipalities. About two-thirds of those receiving this support have neurodevelopmental conditions, primarily autism or ADHD. Many are young adults in the process of adapting to new roles and expectations in different life domains, including education, work, and accommodation. This study aimed to provide a qualitative description of support workers' views on current practice in housing support for young adults (aged 18 to 29) with neurodevelopmental conditions. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 34 housing support workers across 19 Swedish regions. An inductive qualitative content analysis approach was used. The interviews depicted a complex service, subject to organizational aspects (roles, responsibilities, availability, and allocation), the joint effort of key players (young adults, relatives, and support workers), and practical aspects of service provision (finding common ground for the work, and delivery of support). Some elements of the service were poorly designed for the target group. The support workers expressed a need for more knowledge about neurodevelopmental conditions, but also described new insights related to remote delivery of support. The results raise important questions about how housing support should be organized and delivered to strike the right balance between support and autonomy, meet specific needs, and ensure equal services across municipalities. Future research should adopt multiple perspectives and approaches, to help translate best practice and available evidence into a flexible and sustainable service.

Adopting, implementing and assimilating coproduced health and social care innovations involving structurally vulnerable populations: findings from a longitudinal, multiple case study design in Canada, Scotland and Sweden

BACKGROUND

Innovations in coproduction are shaping public service reform in diverse contexts around the world. Although many innovations are local, others have expanded and evolved over time. We know very little, however, about the process of implementation and evolution of coproduction. The purpose of this study was to explore the adoption, implementation and assimilation of three approaches to the coproduction of public services with structurally vulnerable groups.

METHODS

We conducted a 4 year longitudinal multiple case study (2019-2023) of three coproduced public service innovations involving vulnerable populations: ESTHER in Jönköping Region, Sweden involving people with multiple complex needs (Case 1); Making Recovery Real in Dundee, Scotland with people who have serious mental illness (Case 2); and Learning Centres in Manitoba, Canada (Case 3), also involving people with serious mental illness. Data sources included 14 interviews with strategic decision-makers and a document analysis to understand the history and contextual factors relating to each case. Three frameworks informed the case study protocol, semi-structured interview guides, data extraction, deductive coding and analysis: the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, the Diffusion of Innovation model and Lozeau's Compatibility Gaps to understand assimilation.

RESULTS

The adoption of coproduction involving structurally vulnerable populations was a notable evolution of existing improvement efforts in Cases 1 and 3, while impetus by an external change agency, existing collaborative efforts among community organizations, and the opportunity to inform a new municipal mental health policy sparked adoption in Case 2. In all cases, coproduced innovation centred around a central philosophy that valued lived experience on an equal basis with professional knowledge in coproduction processes. This philosophical orientation offered flexibility and adaptability to local contexts, thereby facilitating implementation when compared with more defined programming. According to the informants, efforts to avoid co-optation risks were successful, resulting in the assimilation of new mindsets and coproduction processes, with examples of how this had led to transformative change.

CONCLUSIONS

In exploring innovations in coproduction with structurally vulnerable groups, our findings suggest several additional considerations when applying existing theoretical frameworks. These include the philosophical nature of the innovation, the need to study the evolution of the innovation itself as it emerges over time, greater attention to partnered processes as disruptors to existing power structures and an emphasis on driving transformational change in organizational cultures.

A Web-Based Tool to Assess Social Inclusion and Support Care Planning in Mental Health Supported Accommodation: Development and Preliminary Test Study

BACKGROUND

Individuals with severe mental illness living in supported accommodation are often socially excluded. Social inclusion is an important aspect of recovery-based practice and quality of life. The Social Inclusion Questionnaire User Experience (SInQUE) is a measure of social inclusion that has been validated for use with people with mental health problems. Previous research has suggested that the SInQUE could also help support care planning focused on enabling social inclusion in routine mental health practice.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to develop a web-based version of the SInQUE for use in mental health supported accommodation services, examine its acceptability and perceived usefulness as a tool to support care planning with service users, determine the extent of uptake of the tool in supported accommodation settings, and develop a program theory and logic model for the online SInQUE.

METHODS

This study involved a laboratory-testing stage to assess the acceptability of the SInQUE tool through "think-aloud" testing with 6 supported accommodation staff members and a field-testing stage to assess the acceptability, utility, and use of the SInQUE tool over a 5-month period. An implementation strategy was used in 1 London borough to encourage the use of the SInQUE. Qualitative interviews with 12 service users and 12 staff members who used the tool were conducted and analyzed using thematic analysis. The use of the SInQUE was compared with that in 2 other local authority areas, 1 urban and 1 rural, where the tool was made available for use but no implementation strategy was used.

RESULTS

Overall, 17 staff members used the SInQUE with 28 different service users during the implementation period (approximately 10% of all service users living in supported accommodation in the study area). The staff and service users interviewed felt that the SInQUE was collaborative, comprehensive, user-friendly, and relevant. Although some staff were concerned that particular questions might be too personal, service users did not echo this view. Participants generally felt that the SInQUE could help identify individuals' priorities regarding different aspects of social inclusion by prompting in-depth conversations and tailoring specific support to address service users' inclusion goals. Some interviewees also suggested that the tool could highlight areas of unmet or unmeetable needs across the borough that could feed into service planning. The SInQUE was not used in the comparison areas that had no implementation strategy.

CONCLUSIONS

The online SInQUE is an acceptable and potentially useful tool that can be recommended to assess and support care planning to enable social inclusion of people living in mental health supported accommodation services. Despite this, uptake rates were modest during the study period. A concerted implementation strategy is key to embedding its use in usual care, including proactive endorsement by senior leaders and service managers.

"It's not just the residents who need to be motivated for activity": a qualitative study of the perspectives of staff on providing activity support for people with psychiatric disabilities in supported housing in Sweden

Background

The goals for staff in Supported Housing for people with psychiatric disabilities include helping to develop the residents' independence and self-confidence in activities. However, staff have expressed frustration about providing this type of support when motivating residents to engage in meaningful activities and also about the difficulty in finding suitable levels of independence within a housing setting with limitations.

Objective

The aim is to explore the views and experiences of housing staff in Supported Housing on how they can stimulate and support engagement in activities for people with psychiatric disabilities.

Methods

Twenty-six members of staff from 20 supported housing units in 10 municipalities in Sweden were interviewed in five focus groups. A semi-structured interview guide was used, and the transcribed material was analyzed using qualitative content analysis.

Results

Three main categories emerged from the analysis: Multi-faceted factors influencing the staff's provision of activity support, Staff's approach for supporting activities, and Staff's struggles to develop their work. Obstacles to participating in activities in the community were identified. Many contrasting factors were found, such as spontaneous or structured activities and individual or group activities, which affected the staff's ability to motivate to activity.

Conclusion

A broad approach encompassing in-house training including a focus on values, recruitment policies, staff supervision and interventions focusing on both residents and staff are ways to support staff in motivating residents toward being more active within Supported Housing.

Opportunities and barriers for occupational engagement among residents in supported housing

Opportunities and barriers for occupational engagement among residents in supported housing.

BACKGROUND

Research shows that people with psychiatric disabilities view supported housing (SH) as a possibility for social contact, but also as entailing a risk of deprived self-determination. There is, however, little research on the target group's engagement in everyday occupations.

AIM

To explore SH residents' opportunities and barriers for occupational engagement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixteen participants were interviewed, and data was analysed using content analysis.

RESULTS

An overarching theme, Struggling to create meaning and seeking affection, and three underlying categories, emerged. Finding meaning through self-chosen occupations and support focussed on receiving support, doing self-chosen occupations, and having social contacts. Feeling neglected and insecure limits engagement in occupations was related to feelings of not being seen by staff, and insecurity, which hampered daily life. The third theme was Having a negative self-image and low level of ability hinders an active life.

CONCLUSION

Residents' self-view and ability to create an inner drive for being active was important for occupational engagement, which was linked to social connectedness. Occupational based interventions and a personal recovery approach is warranted in order to facilitate needs for meaningful occupations.

SIGNIFICANCE

The results from the study can be used to further develop optimal support within SH units.

Assisted living for mentally ill-a systematic literature review and its recommendations

BACKGROUND

The reduction in psychiatric hospital beds in the past decades has created a need for assisted living (AL). Even though AL is widely used, studies on it are scarce.

AIMS

To identify (1) study characteristics of the reviewed articles, (2) characteristics of inhabitants and characteristics of different types of AL, (3) financial costs in different types of AL, (4) the individual outcomes in AL inhabitants and quality of care.

METHODS

A systematic literature review on AL for the mentally ill focusing on inhabitant and AL features and their costs was conducted. Articles written in English from January 2000 to June of 2020, concerning adults were included. Simple Taxonomy of Supported Housing (STAX-SA) was applied and used for categorizing types of AL.

RESULTS

Twenty-five papers met our criteria. The majority of inhabitants were unemployed single male with psychotic disorders. The type of AL is mainly categorized according to staffing, provided support, and housing arrangement. In UK ALs with moderate support (STAX-SA 2-3) had the best quality of care while ALs with low support (STAX-SA 4) was the cheapest. Quality of care was better in small units with preset expected length of stay for inhabitants. Hospital treatment was significantly more expensive than any type of AL. Living in AL improved quality of life compared to hospital treatment, also psychiatric symptoms were reduced.

CONCLUSION

There is an evident need for evidence-based studies in a longitudinal comprehensive manner that evaluates different AL types, function of the inhabitants, and costs with respect to the quality of AL and care and outcome.

The level of formal support received by people with severe mental illness living in supported accommodation and participation: A systematic review

AIM

The review aimed to identify and explore the association of level of support received by people with severe mental illness in supported accommodation and participation.

METHOD

The authors conducted a systematic search in MEDLINE, PsychINFO, PsychARTICLES, CINAHL Plus and ASSIA. Searches were restricted to articles published in English and participants aged 18 years and over with severe mental illness. Articles were included based on level of support received in mental health supported accommodation, classified according to the Simple Taxonomy for Supported Accommodation, and three factors of participation: social participation, daily living functioning and personal empowerment. Studies of in-patient settings and nursing homes were excluded. The review protocol is registered on PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42019161808).

RESULTS

Six articles were included in the review from USA, Australia, Sweden and Taiwan. Factors of participation for people living in accommodation with moderate support and accommodation with high support were explored. Data indicated an association between level of support and participation showing that people living in accommodation with moderate support had increased participation compared to people living in accommodation with high support.

CONCLUSION

This review identified an association between level of formal support and participation. People with SMI living in accommodation with medium support participated in more community occupations, more activities and had a higher level of personal empowerment than people living in accommodation with high support.

A Systematic Review of the Characteristics and Efficacy of Recovery Training for Mental Health Staff: Implications for Supported Accommodation Services

Evidence suggests a link between recovery-oriented practise and service user outcomes in supported accommodation settings. Current clinical guidelines recommend recovery training for supported accommodation staff, however evidence relating to the effectiveness of this type of training is unclear. This review aimed to describe and compare the characteristics and efficacy of existing recovery training packages for mental health staff. The appropriateness and applicability of the interventions was considered in relation to UK supported accommodation services. Initial search processes returned 830 papers. After duplicate removal, inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to 489 papers, leaving a final sample of seven papers. Data were reviewed using a narrative synthesis approach. The reviewed papers showed variation in the aims, frequency, and duration of the training interventions, although all included content consistent with the five-domains of the CHIME model. All interventions used direct, in-person teaching, and prioritised interactive, experiential learning, however a number were limited by the absence of feedback, the use of one-off, rather than repeated/follow-up sessions, and a reliance on classroom-based, rather than in-vivo, training. There was limited evidence to suggest a consistent effect of training on staff or service user outcomes, and there was no clear association between the delivery and design characteristics of the interventions and reported outcomes. In considering the development of recovery training for supported accommodation staff, little guidance can be taken from the reviewed literature. Any training package must be developed with consideration of the unique contextual and organisational characteristics of these services. The authors recommend viewing training as one component of a broader goal of service transformation.

Recovery in Supported Accommodations: A Scoping Review and Synthesis of Interventions for People with Severe Mental Illness

Research on the recovery domains beside clinical recovery of people with severe mental illness in need of supported accommodations is limited. The aim of this study was (1) to investigate which recovery interventions exist for this group of people and (2) to explore the scientific evidence. We conducted a scoping review, including studies with different designs, evaluating the effectiveness the recovery interventions available. The search resulted in 53 eligible articles of which 22 focused on societal recovery, six on personal recovery, five on functional recovery, 13 on lifestyle-interventions, and seven on creative and spiritual interventions. About a quarter of these interventions showed added value and half of them initial promising results. The research in this area is still limited, but a number of recovery promoting interventions on other areas than clinical recovery have been developed and evaluated. Further innovation and research to strengthen and repeat the evidence are needed.

Predictors of moving on from mental health supported accommodation in England: national cohort study

BACKGROUND

Around 60 000 people in England live in mental health supported accommodation. There are three main types: residential care, supported housing and floating outreach. Supported housing and floating outreach aim to support service users in moving on to more independent accommodation within 2 years, but there has been little research investigating their effectiveness.

AIMS

A 30-month prospective cohort study investigating outcomes for users of mental health supported accommodation.

METHOD

We used random sampling, accounting for relevant geographical variation factors, to recruit 87 services (22 residential care, 35 supported housing and 30 floating outreach) and 619 service users (residential care 159, supported housing 251, floating outreach 209) across England. We contacted services every 3 months to investigate the proportion of service users who successfully moved on to more independent accommodation. Multilevel modelling was used to estimate how much of the outcome and cost variations were due to service type and quality, after accounting for service-user characteristics.

RESULTS

Overall 243/586 participants successfully moved on (residential care 15/146, supported housing 96/244, floating outreach 132/196). This was most likely for floating outreach service users (versus residential care: odds ratio 7.96, 95% CI 2.92-21.69, P < 0.001; versus supported housing: odds ratio 2.74, 95% CI 1.01-7.41, P < 0.001) and was associated with reduced costs of care and two aspects of service quality: promotion of human rights and recovery-based practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Most people do not move on from supported accommodation within the expected time frame. Greater focus on human rights and recovery-based practice may increase service effectiveness.

Mental health supported accommodation services in England and in Italy: a comparison

PURPOSE

England and Italy are considered pioneers in the development of community mental health services. Both have implemented supported accommodation services for those with more complex needs, which can be broadly categorized into three main types with similar specification. The aim of this study was to compare the characteristics of these services and their users in England and Italy.

METHODS

Data from two cross-sectional surveys of supported accommodation services undertaken across England and in Verona, Italy (England-619 service users from 87 services; Verona-167 service users from 25 services) were compared.

RESULTS

Service users in the two samples had similar socio-demographic and clinical characteristics; most were male, unmarried and unemployed, with a primary diagnosis of schizophrenia or other psychosis and over 15 years contact with mental health services. Supported accommodation occupancy was high in both samples. The actual length of stay was greater than the expected length of stay for all three service types but overall turnover was similar between countries (p = 0.070). Across services, total needs and quality of life were higher for Italian compared to English service users (p < 0.001 for both) but, unmet needs were lower amongst English service users (p < 0.001). Around 40% in both samples moved to more independent accommodation successfully within 30 months.

CONCLUSIONS

England and Italy have similar mental health supported accommodation pathways to assist those with more complex needs to gain skills for community living, but individuals tend to require longer than expected at each stage.

Supported accommodation for people with mental health problems: the QuEST research programme with feasibility RCT

Background

Across England, around 60,000 people live in mental health supported accommodation: residential care, supported housing and floating outreach. Residential care and supported housing provide on-site support (residential care provides the highest level), whereas floating outreach staff visit people living in their own tenancies. Despite their abundance, little is known about the quality and outcomes of these services.

Objectives

The aim was to assess the quality, costs and effectiveness of mental health supported accommodation services in England. The objectives were (1) to adapt the Quality Indicator for Rehabilitative Care (QuIRC) and the Client Assessment of Treatment scale for use in mental health supported accommodation services; (2) to assess the quality and costs of these services in England and the proportion of people who ‘move on’ to less supported accommodation without placement breakdown (e.g. to move from residential care to supported housing or supported housing to floating outreach, or, for those receiving floating outreach, to manage with fewer hours of support); (3) to identify service and service user factors (including costs) associated with greater quality of life, autonomy and successful move-on; and (4) to carry out a feasibility trial to assess the required sample size and appropriate outcomes for a randomised evaluation of two existing models of supported accommodation.

Design

Objective 1 – focus groups with staff (n = 12) and service users (n = 16); psychometric testing in 52 services, repeated in 87 services (adapted QuIRC) and with 618 service users (adapted Client Assessment of Treatment scale). Objectives 2 and 3 – national survey and prospective cohort study involving 87 services (residential care, n = 22; supported housing, n = 35; floating outreach, n = 30) and 619 service users followed over 30 months; qualitative interviews with 30 staff and 30 service users. Objective 4 – individually randomised, parallel-group feasibility trial in three centres.

Setting

English mental health supported accommodation services.

Participants

Staff and users of mental health supported accomodation services.

Interventions

Feasibility trial involved two existing models of supported accommodation: supported housing and floating outreach.

Main outcome measures

Cohort study – proportion of participants who successfully moved to less supported accommodation at 30 months’ follow-up without placement breakdown. Feasibility trial – participant recruitment and withdrawal rates.

Results

The adapted QuIRC [QuIRC: Supported Accomodation (QuIRC-SA)] had excellent inter-rater reliability, and exploratory factor analysis confirmed its structural validity (all items loaded onto the relevant domain at the > ± 0.3 level). The adapted Client Assessment of Treatment for Supported Accommodation had good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha 0.89) and convergent validity (r s = 0.369; p < 0.001). Supported housing services scored higher than residential care and floating outreach on six out of seven QuIRC-SA quality domains. Service users had a high prevalence of severe self-neglect (57%) and vulnerability to exploitation (37%). Those in supported housing (25%) and floating outreach (20%) experienced more crime than those in residential care (4%) but had greater autonomy. Residential care was the most expensive service (mean cost per resident per week was £581 for residential care, £261 for supported housing and £66 for floating outreach) but supported users with the greatest needs. After adjusting for clinical differences, quality of life was similar for users of supported housing and residential care (mean difference –0.138, 95% confidence interval –0.402 to 0.126; p = 0.306), whereas autonomy was greater for supported housing users (mean difference 0.145, 95% confidence interval 0.010 to 0.279; p = 0.035). Qualitative interviews showed that staff and service users shared an understanding of service goals and what constituted effective support. After adjusting for clinical differences, those in floating outreach were more likely to move on successfully at 30 months’ follow-up than those in residential care [odds ratio (OR) 7.96; p < 0.001] and supported housing (OR 2.74; p < 0.001), and this was more likely for users of supported housing than residential care (OR 2.90; p = 0.04). Successful move-on was positively associated with scores on two QuIRC-SA domains: the degree to which the service promoted ‘human rights’ (e.g. facilitating access to advocacy) and ‘recovery-based practice’ (e.g. holding therapeutic optimism and providing collaborative, individualised care planning). Service use costs for those who moved on were significantly lower than for those who did not. Recruitment in the feasibility trial was difficult: 1432 people were screened but only eight were randomised. Barriers included concerns about accommodation being decided at random and a perceived lack of equipoise among clinicians who felt that individuals needed to ‘step down’ from supported housing to floating outreach services.

Conclusions

We did not find clear evidence on the most effective model(s) of mental health supported accommodation. Indeed, our feasibility study suggests that trials comparing effectiveness cannot be conducted in this country. A range of options are required to provide appropriate support to individuals with differing needs.

Future work

Future research in this field requires alternatives to trials. Service planners should be guided by the mental health needs of the local population and the pros and cons of the different services that our study identified, rather than purely financial drivers.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN19689576.

Funding

This programme was funded by the National Institute for Heath Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 7, No. 7. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. The fundholders are Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust and the research is a collaboration between University College London, Queen Mary University of London, King’s College London, the University of Ulster and Durham University.

Feasibility Randomised Trial Comparing Two Forms of Mental Health Supported Accommodation (Supported Housing and Floating Outreach); a Component of the QuEST (Quality and Effectiveness of Supported Tenancies) Study

Background: Mental health supported accommodation services are implemented across England, usually organised into a 'step-down' care pathway that requires the individual to repeatedly move as they gain skills and confidence for more independent living. There have been no trials comparing the effectiveness of different types of supported accommodation, but two widely used models (supported housing and floating outreach) have been found to provide similar support. We aimed to assess the feasibility of conducting a large-scale trial comparing these two models. Methods: Individually randomised, parallel group feasibility trial in three regions of England (North London, East London, and Cheltenham and Gloucestershire). We aimed to recruit 60 participants in 15 months, referred to supported accommodation, randomly allocated on an equal basis to receive either a local supported housing or floating outreach service. We assessed referrals to the trial, participants recruited, attrition, time from recruitment to moving into either type of supported accommodation, and feasibility of masking. We conducted a process evaluation to examine our results further. Results: We screened 1,432 potential participants, of whom 17 consented to participate, with 8 agreeing to randomisation (of whom 1 was lost to attrition) and 9 participating in naturalistic follow-up. Our process evaluation indicated that the main obstacle to recruitment was staff and service user preferences for certain types of supported accommodation or for specific services. Staff also felt that randomisation compromised their professional judgement. Conclusions: Our results do not support investment in a large-scale trial in England at this time. Trial registration: UK CRN Portfolio database, Trial ID: ISRCTN19689576. Trial funding: National Institute of Health Research (RP-PG-0707-10093).

Housing and Support Narratives of People Experiencing Mental Health Issues: Making My Place, My Home

Background: Choice, control, privacy, and security are widely reported housing preferences of mental health consumers, are associated with improved well-being and greater housing satisfaction, and are important for recovery. This paper describes housing and neighborhood experiences from a larger qualitative study that sought to learn with people experiencing mental health issues about their everyday lives in an Australian urban community. Methods: A participatory approach to health research informed this study. A participatory reference group, including four people with consumer perspective knowledge and experience of mental health issues and four mental health practitioners with service provider and researcher perspectives, worked together to design and implement this study over a 4-year period. Thirty-nine participants were recruited, including 18 women and 21 men living in metropolitan Melbourne and receiving community mental health care for ongoing mental health issues related mainly to either psychotic or affective disorders. Participants each took part in one to three interviews or a focus group. The data were transcribed and analyzed using narrative and thematic analytic strategies, underpinned by reflective discussions with the participatory reference group. Findings: Participants' experiences of their housing and neighborhoods emphasized qualities that either contributed to or challenged their sense of being "at home." Identifying with a place as home was transformative, especially when supported by friendly neighborhood interactions, safety, and accessibility of local amenities. Unsatisfactory housing situations and limited income worked against participants' efforts to regain a sense of well-being and improve their situations. When being home was challenging, strategies used to counteract this included getting a pet and getting out as a means of resisting isolation at home. Differing views and ways of using the available support workers were described, suggesting tensions between seeking to be self-sufficient and valuing support. Conclusions: Social housing locations and housing-related support should explicitly attend to safety and security concerns. Collaborative care planning and outreach support should attend to supports for navigating issues with neighbors, housing, harnessing natural supports, and opportunities for being in others' company, as well as recognizing the importance of pets in people's lives. Understanding the strategies that mental health consumers find helpful in creating a sense of being at home, and the role of "place" in recovery merit further consideration in research and practice.

Service user experiences of specialist mental health supported accommodation: A systematic review of qualitative studies and narrative synthesis

Specialist supported accommodation services have become a key component of most community-based mental healthcare systems. While mental health policies highlight the importance of service user involvement in service development and care planning, there are no comprehensive literature reviews synthesising services users' perspectives on, or experiences of, supported accommodation services. This systematic review was undertaken to fill this gap. We searched electronic databases (January 2015, updated June 2017), conducted hand searches and used forward-backward snowballing to identify 13,678 papers. We inspected the full-text of 110 papers and included 50 of these in the final review. Data extraction and quality assessments were conducted. We used narrative synthesis to develop a conceptual model of service users' experiences that included structural, process, relational and contextual factors, such as the characteristics of the service, relationships with staff and other service users, the intensity and nature of support, the physical environment, and social and community integration. The review highlights the complex interplay of individual, service-level and community factors in shaping the lived experience of service users and their impact on personal identity and recovery. Our approach addressed some of the widely reported limitations of the quantitative research in this field, providing a conceptual model relevant to service user experiences across supported accommodation service types, population groups and countries.

Predictors of quality of care in mental health supported accommodation services in England: a multiple regression modelling study

BACKGROUND

Specialist mental health supported accommodation services are a key component to a graduated level of care from hospital to independently living in the community for people with complex, longer term mental health problems. However, they come at a high cost and there has been a lack of research on the quality of these services. The QuEST (Quality and Effectiveness of Supported tenancies) study, a five-year programme of research funded by the National Institute for Health Research, aimed to address this. It included the development of the first standardised quality assessment tool for supported accommodation services, the QuIRC-SA (Quality Indicator for Rehabilitative Care - Supported Accommodation). Using data collected from the QuIRC-SA, we aimed to identify potential service characteristics that were associated with quality of care.

METHODS

Data collected from QuIRC-SAs with 150 individual services in England (28 residential care, 87 supported housing and 35 floating outreach) from four different sources were analysed using multiple regression modelling to investigate associations between service characteristics (local authority area index score, total beds/spaces, staffing intensity, percentage of male service users and service user ability) and areas of quality of care (Living Environment, Therapeutic Environment, Treatments and Interventions, Self-Management and Autonomy, Social Interface, Human Rights and Recovery Based Practice).

RESULTS

The local authority area in which the service is located, the service size (number of beds/places) and the usual expected length of stay were each negatively associated with up to six of the seven QuIRC-SA domains. Staffing intensity was positively associated with two domains (Therapeutic Environment and Treatments and Interventions) and negatively associated with one (Human Rights). The percentage of male service users was positively associated with one domain (Treatments and Interventions) and service user ability was not associated with any of the domains.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified service characteristics associated with quality of care in specialist mental health supported accommodation services that can be used in the design and specification of services.