Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2014 Aug 29:14:243.
doi: 10.1186/s12888-014-0243-6.

The strengths based approach as a service delivery model for severe mental illness: a meta-analysis of clinical trials

Nashwa Ibrahim, Maria Michail, Patrick Callaghan
Meta-Analysis

The strengths based approach as a service delivery model for severe mental illness: a meta-analysis of clinical trials

Nashwa Ibrahim et al. BMC Psychiatry. .

Abstract

Background: The strengths-based approach is considered a paradigm shift from the deficits- focused service delivery models. The aim of this review was to systematically review randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi experimental studies examining the impact of the strengths-based approach on level of functioning and quality of life as primary outcomes and psychotic symptoms as secondary outcomes in people diagnosed with severe mental illness.

Methods: This review was conducted in the School of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom. Participants in the primary studies were adults diagnosed with psychotic disorders. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed independently by two reviewers using "Consort 2010" checklist for the randomized controlled trials or "TREND" for the quasi-experimental studies. The EPOC checklist was used for data extraction while management of data and meta-analysis were performed using Review Manager software (RevMan version 5.2).

Results: No significant difference was found between the strengths-based approach and other service delivery models in level of functioning and quality of life. However, a significant effect on symptoms favouring other service delivery models was reported.

Conclusion: Based upon evidence of moderate quality, this review suggests there is no effect of the strengths-based model of service delivery in level of functioning and quality of life in adults diagnosed with severe mental illness. The number of trials is low; therefore further evidence is required to ascertain the impact of the strengths-based approach in community mental health care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
PRISMA flow diagram of the search process.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Forest plot of level of functioning outcome.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Forest plot of level of functioning after removing (unticking or unchecking) the outlier study (Chamberlain, [ 19 ] ).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Forest plot of quality of life outcome.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Forest plot of symptoms outcome.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Forest plot of symptoms outcome after removing (unticking or unchecking) the outlier study (Barry et al. [ 18 ] ).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Gottlieb L. Strengths-Based Nursing Care Health and Healing for Person and Family. United States of America: Springer Publishing Company, LLC; 2013.
    1. Fukui S, Goscha R, Rapp CA, Mabry A, Liddy P, Marty D. Strengths model case management fidelity scores and client outcomes. Psychiatr Serv. 2012;63(7):708–710. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201100373. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Staudt M, Howardw MO, Drake B. The operationalization, implementation, and effectiveness of the strengths perspective: a review of empirical studies. J Soc Serv Res. 2001;27(3):1–21. doi: 10.1300/J079v27n03_01. - DOI
    1. Rapp CA, Goscha RJ. The Strengths Model: A Recovery-Oriented Approach to Mental Health Services. New York: Oxford University Press; 2011.
    1. Van Tulder M, Furlan A, Bombardier C, Bouter L, Group EBotCCBR Updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane collaboration back review group. Spine. 2003;28(12):1290–1299. - PubMed

Publication types