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
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2018 Nov 12;18(1):363.
doi: 10.1186/s12888-018-1941-2.

Health care utilization and cost after discharge from a mental health hospital; an RCT comparing community residential aftercare and treatment as usual

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Health care utilization and cost after discharge from a mental health hospital; an RCT comparing community residential aftercare and treatment as usual

Eirik Roos et al. BMC Psychiatry. .

Abstract

Background: Community residential aftercare (step-down) services can ease the transition after a mental health hospital stay for patients with severe mental illness (SMI).

Aims: To investigate use of community and specialised mental health care services and costs in patients with SMI the first 12 months after discharge from a mental health hospital (MHH), comparing community residential aftercare (CRA) and treatment as usual.

Methods: An open parallel group randomised controlled trial with 41 participants. Data on use of specialist services (hospital, ambulant treatment and outpatient treatment) and community services (residential stays, home help, home care nursing, mental health consultation) were collected from specialist and community registers and health records.

Results: For the primary outcome, utilisation of community mental health services, the intervention group used, on average, 29% fewer hours (mean differences - 21.6 h, 95% CI -93.1 to 44.9, p = .096) with a cost saving of 29% (mean differences - 1845 EUR, 95% CI -8267 to 4171, p = .102), but the estimates were imprecise. For the secondary outcome, the study groups had the same total number of inpatient days (66 days), but the intervention group had on average of 13.4 fewer inpatient days in the mental health hospital (95% CI -29.9 to 0.9. p = .008). The number of inpatient admissions (mean difference - 0.9 admissions, 95% CI -3.5 to 1.5, p = .224) and readmissions (- 0.8, 95% CI -2.5 to 0.9. p = .440) was lower in the intervention group. The intervention group had on average a total cost saving of 38.5% (mean differences - 23,071 EUR, 95% CI -45,450 to 3027. p = .057). A post hoc multivariable regression analysis controlling for baseline characteristics gave a reduction in total cost in favour of the intervention group of - 19,781 EUR (95% CI -44,072 to 4509, p=,107).

Conclusion: In this study, it was not possible to draw a definite conclusion about the effect, due to the small sample and imprecision of the estimates. The direction of the results and size of the point estimate, in addition to findings in other studies, indicates that transferring patients ready for discharge from mental hospital to community residential aftercare can have the potential to reduce total consumption of health services and costs without increased hospital admissions.

Trial registration: Registered in clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT01719354 ).

Keywords: Community residential aftercare; Discharge-ready mental health patients; Severe mental illness; Step-down.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This was an open parallel group randomised controlled trial including patients from January 2013 to April 2015. It was approved by the Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics in Central Norway (2011/1770) and was registered in clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01719354). The patients had to be older than 18 years and they had to sign the informed consent.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The first author (ER) worked with the establishment of the CRA as an advisor to the chief officer in the municipality, but has not been involved in the day to day operation of the service. The other authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow chart
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Box plot for the primary outcome total number of hours of community mental health services (a), and the secondary outcome total cost of specialist and community health services in euro (b) from baseline to twelve months

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Zhang J, Harvey C, Andrew C. Factors associated with length of stay and the risk of readmission in an acute psychiatric inpatient facility: a retrospective study. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2011;45(7):578–585. doi: 10.3109/00048674.2011.585452. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Laursen TM, Munk-Olsen T, Vestergaard M. Life expectancy and cardiovascular mortality in persons with schizophrenia. Curr Opin Psychiatry. 2012;25(2):83–88. doi: 10.1097/YCO.0b013e32835035ca. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Davydow DS, Ribe AR, Pedersen HS, Fenger-Gron M, Cerimele JM, Vedsted P, Vestergaard M. Serious mental illness and risk for hospitalizations and Rehospitalizations for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions in Denmark: a Nationwide population-based cohort study. Med Care. 2016;54(1):90–97. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000448. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Tulloch AD, Fearon P, David AS. Length of stay of general psychiatric inpatients in the United States: systematic review. Admin Pol Ment Health. 2011;38(3):155–168. doi: 10.1007/s10488-010-0310-3. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kunitoh N. From hospital to the community: the influence of deinstitutionalization on discharged long-stay psychiatric patients. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2013;67(6):384–396. doi: 10.1111/pcn.12071. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data