Implementing an Action Over Inertia Group Program in Community Residential Rehabilitation Services: Group Participant and Facilitator Perspectives

Effectiveness of Interventions for Meaningful Activity Participation in Homelessness: A Systematic Review

Background. Meaningful activity participation has been identified as a key outcome of services designed to support individuals during and following homelessness. Little is known about the effectiveness of interventions for promoting this outcome. Purpose. To identify the range and effectiveness of interventions on promoting meaningful activity participation among persons with experiences of homelessness. Method. We conducted a systematic review using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology following PRISMA guidelines including a critical appraisal and narrative synthesis. Findings. Of 12,343 titles and abstracts screened, we included 12 studies. The authors of the included studies primarily used standardized measures of meaningful activity engagement. Critical appraisal scores ranged from 50.0 to 77.8. The most common interventions evaluated in the included studies were psychosocial interventions (n = 6; 50.0%), followed by case management and housing support interventions (n = 4; 33.3%) and Housing First (n = 2; 16.7%). While several interventions demonstrated effectiveness in promoting meaningful activity participation including psychosocial and case management interventions, Housing First, Critical Time Intervention, and a peer support intervention were found to be ineffective for promoting engagement in meaningful activity. Conclusion. Few intervention studies have been conducted that demonstrate effectiveness for promoting participation in meaningful activity for individuals during and following homelessness. Occupational therapy researchers and practitioners can build on existing evidence by developing and evaluating novel approaches by co-designing interventions in collaboration with persons with experiences of homelessness and service providers.

Community-based models of care facilitating the recovery of people living with persistent and complex mental health needs: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

Objective

This study aims to assess the effectiveness of community-based models of care (MoCs) supporting the recovery of individuals who experience persistent and complex mental health needs.

Method

We conducted a systematic review and narrative synthesis of MoC studies reporting clinical, functional, or personal recovery from October 2016 to October 2021. Sources were Medline, EMBASE, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases. Studies were grouped according to MoC features. The narrative synthesis was led by our researchers with lived experience.

Results

Beneficial MoCs ranged from well-established to novel and updated models and those explicitly addressing recovery goals and incorporating peer support: goal-focused; integrated community treatment; intensive case management; partners in recovery care coordination; rehabilitation and recovery-focused; social and community connection-focused; supported accommodation; and vocational support. None of our diverse group of MoCs supporting recovery warranted a rating of best practice. Established MoCs, such as intensive case management, are promising practices regarding clinical and functional recovery, with potential for enhancements to support personal recovery. Emerging practice models that support personal and functional recovery are those where consumer goals and priorities are central.

Conclusion

Evidence for established models of care shows that there is a need for inevitable evolution and adaptation. Considering the high importance of effective MoCs for people experiencing persistent and complex mental health needs, further attention to service innovation and research is required. Greater emphasis on the inclusion of lived and living experience in the design, delivery, implementation, and research of MoCs is needed, to enhance MOCs' relevance for achieving individual consumer recovery outcomes.

Meaningful Activities and Recovery (MA&R): a co-led peer occupational therapy intervention for people with psychiatric disabilities. Results from a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Activity and participation are critical to health and wellbeing. Limited evidence exists on how to support people with mental illness in participating in everyday activities.

AIM

To investigate the effectiveness of Meaningful Activities and Recovery (MA&R), a co-led peer occupational therapy intervention focusing on activity engagement, functioning, quality of life, and personal recovery.

METHODS

In a statistician blinded, multicenter RCT including 139 participants from seven community and municipal mental health services in Denmark, participants were randomly assigned to 1) MA&R and standard mental health care or 2) standard mental health care. The MA&R intervention lasted 8 months and consisted of 11 group sessions, 11 individual sessions, and support to engage in activities. The primary outcome, activity engagement, was measured using Profile of Occupational Engagement in People with Severe Mental Illness (POES-S). Outcomes were measured at baseline and post-intervention follow-up.

RESULTS

Meaningful Activities and Recovery was delivered with high fidelity and 83% completed the intervention. It did not demonstrate superiority to standard mental health care, as intention-to treat analysis revealed no significant differences between the groups in activity engagement or any of the secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSION

We did not find positive effects of MA&R, possibly because of COVID-19 and related restrictions. Fidelity assessments and adherence rates suggest that MA&R is feasible and acceptable. However, future studies should focus on refining the intervention before investigating its effectiveness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered 24/05/2019 at ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03963245.

Self-reported needs of people living with psychotic disorders: Results from the Australian national psychosis survey

Person-centered care is a collaborative approach to health care. To provide effective, person-centered care to people living with severe mental illness, it is necessary to understand how people view their own needs. The Perceived Need for Care Questionnaire (PNCQ) was used in the Australian National Survey of High Impact Psychosis (SHIP) to deepen understanding and evaluate, at a population level, the needs of Australian adults living with psychotic illness. SHIP participants were 1,825 adults, aged 18-65 years, living with psychotic illness and in contact with public specialized mental health services across Australia in 2010. The survey package included demographic and clinical items, and various scales including the PNCQ appraising a comprehensive range of life domains. Logistic regressions measured the impact that various demographic, clinical and psychosocial independent variables (e.g., loneliness, health-related quality of life, disability, accommodation type) had on the likelihood of inadequately met PNCQ domain-related need. Over two-thirds of people living with psychosis reported at least two areas of unmet need for care despite most being in contact with mental health services. Work or using one's time and socializing, counseling, and self-care domains had the largest proportion of inadequately met needs (range between 49 and 57%). Feelings of loneliness and/or social isolation were significantly associated with unmet needs across all PNCQ domains, except for financial needs. Health-related quality of life was significantly associated with unmet needs across all domains, except for housing needs. Disability was significantly associated with unmet social, occupation (work or time use), housing and medication-related needs. Consumers view their needs for care as unmet across many life areas despite being in contact with mental health services. Loneliness, unmet psychosocial needs, and health-related quality of life appear strongly interconnected and warrant greater attention in the delivery of person-centered care for people living with psychosis. Support to address social, work or time use and housing related needs among people living with psychosis appears less well targeted toward those with disability. Results underscore the link between quality of life, recovery and needs. These inter-relationships should be considered in mental health services research and evaluation.