81
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Interventions to improve discharge from acute adult mental health inpatient care to the community: systematic review and narrative synthesis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The transition from acute mental health inpatient to community care is often a vulnerable period in the pathway, where people can experience additional risks and anxiety. Researchers globally have developed and tested a number of interventions that aim to improve continuity of care and safety in these transitions. However, there has been little attempt to compare and contrast the interventions and specify the variety of safety threats they attempt to resolve.

          Methods

          The study aimed to identify the evidence base for interventions to support continuity of care and safety in the transition from acute mental health inpatient to community services at the point of discharge. Electronic Databases including PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Embase, HMIC, CINAHL, IBSS, Cochrane Library Trials, ASSIA, Web of Science and Scopus, were searched between 2000 and May 2018. Peer reviewed papers were eligible for inclusion if they addressed adults admitted to an acute inpatient mental health ward and reported on health interventions relating to discharge from the acute ward to the community. The results were analysed using a narrative synthesis technique.

          Results

          The total number of papers from which data were extracted was 45. The review found various interventions implemented across continents, addressing problems related to different aspects of discharge. Some interventions followed a distinct named approach (i.e. Critical Time Intervention, Transitional Discharge Model), others were grouped based on key components (i.e. peer support, pharmacist involvement). The primary problems interventions looked to address were reducing readmission, improving wellbeing, reducing homelessness, improving treatment adherence, accelerating discharge, reducing suicide. The 69 outcomes reported across studies were heterogeneous, meaning it was difficult to conduct comparative quantitative meta-analysis or synthesis.

          Conclusions

          The interventions reviewed are spread across a spectrum ranging from addressing a single problem within a single agency with a single solution, to multiple solutions addressing multi-agency problems. We recommend that future research attempts to improve homogeneity in outcome reporting.

          Related collections

          Most cited references60

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Using theory of change to design and evaluate public health interventions: a systematic review

          Background Despite the increasing popularity of the theory of change (ToC) approach, little is known about the extent to which ToC has been used in the design and evaluation of public health interventions. This review aims to determine how ToCs have been developed and used in the development and evaluation of public health interventions globally. Method s We searched for papers reporting the use of “theory of change” in the development or evaluation of public health interventions in databases of peer-reviewed journal articles such as Scopus, Pubmed, PsychInfo, grey literature databases, Google and websites of development funders. We included papers of any date, language or study design. Both abstracts and full text papers were double screened. Data were extracted and narratively and quantitatively summarised. Results A total of 62 papers were included in the review. Forty-nine (79 %) described the development of ToC, 18 (29 %) described the use of ToC in the development of the intervention and 49 (79 %) described the use of ToC in the evaluation of the intervention. Although a large number of papers were included in the review, their descriptions of the ToC development and use in intervention design and evaluation lacked detail. Conclusions The use of the ToC approach is widespread in the public health literature. Clear reporting of the ToC process and outputs is important to strengthen the body of literature on practical application of ToC in order to develop our understanding of the benefits and advantages of using ToC. We also propose a checklist for reporting on the use of ToC to ensure transparent reporting and recommend that our checklist is used and refined by authors reporting the ToC approach. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0422-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Testing Methodological Guidance on the Conduct of Narrative Synthesis in Systematic Reviews: Effectiveness of Interventions to Promote Smoke Alarm Ownership and Function

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Thirty-day readmissions--truth and consequences.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Natasha.tyler@manchester.ac.uk
                Journal
                BMC Health Serv Res
                BMC Health Serv Res
                BMC Health Services Research
                BioMed Central (London )
                1472-6963
                25 November 2019
                25 November 2019
                2019
                : 19
                : 883
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000000121662407, GRID grid.5379.8, NIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, , The University of Manchester, ; Manchester, UK
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8868, GRID grid.4563.4, School of Health Sciences, , University of Nottingham, ; Nottingham, UK
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 7486, GRID grid.6572.6, Health Services Management Centre, School of Social Policy, , University of Birmingham, ; Birmingham, UK
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8257-1090
                Article
                4658
                10.1186/s12913-019-4658-0
                6876082
                31760955
                78f4f098-c4c4-4dfd-823f-76063aeeb6e0
                © The Author(s). 2019

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 6 June 2019
                : 20 October 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: NIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2019

                Health & Social care
                systematic review,care transitions,mental health,interventions,discharge,acute services,psychiatric discharge,hospital discharge

                Comments

                Comment on this article