Zusammenfassung
Anliegen Untersuchung der Wirksamkeit
wohnfeldbasierter psychiatrischer Akutbehandlung („Home
Treatment”; HT) im Vergleich zur traditionell-stationären
Versorgung. Methode Im Rahmen eines prospektiven
Forschungsprojekts wurden die Daten von 60 im HT und 18 stationär
behandelten Patienten hinsichtlich psychopathologischer Symptomatik, globalem
Funktionsniveau und Krankheitsschwere zum Aufnahme- und Entlasszeitpunkt
verglichen. Ergebnisse HT erwies sich als über eine
ganze Reihe psychiatrischer Diagnosen hinweg machbare und ähnlich wirksame
Behandlungsalternative, wie die traditionell-stationäre Versorgung.
Schlussfolgerung Bei potenziell geeigneten Patienten
kann statt einer üblichen stationären Behandlung ein HT erwogen
werden.
Abstract
Objective To investigate the clinical
effectiveness of „Home Treatment” (HT) in comparison to the usual
inpatient treatment in patients with acute psychiatric illness.
Methods In a prospective observational study we compared
60 of our HT patients to 18 patients receiving inpatient treatment as usual
(TAU) with regard to psychopathological symptoms (PANSS, HAM-D 21), global
functioning (GAF), symptom severity (HoNOS-D) and sociodemographic parameters
at admission and discharge. Results HT was a feasible
alternative in patients with several different psychiatric diagnoses and
appeared to be similar to TAU in view of clinical effectiveness.
Conclusions In potentially suitable patients fulfilling
criteria of hospital admission, the alternative of HT can be actively
considered.
Schlüsselwörter
Home Treatment - stationäre Behandlung - Psychopathologie - psychosoziales Funktionsniveau
Keywords
home treatment - inpatient treatment - psychopathology - psychosocial functioning
Literatur
1
Berhe T, Puschner B, Kilian R et al.
„Home Treatment” für psychische
Erkrankungen: Begriffserklärung und Wirksamkeit.
Nervenarzt.
2005;
76
822-831
2
Dean C, Gadd E M.
Home treatment for acute psychiatric illness.
British Med J.
1990;
301
1021-1023
3
Perkins R, Burns T.
Home treatment.
International Journal of Social Psychiatry.
2001;
47
55-66
4
Harrison J, Alam N, Marshall J.
Home or away: which patients are suitable for a psychiatric
home treatment service?.
Psychiatric Bulletin.
2001;
25
310-313
5
Marx A J, Test M A, Stein L I.
Extrahospital management of severe mental illness:
feasibility and effects of social functioning.
Arch Gen Psychiatry.
1973;
29
505-511
6
Stein L I, Test M A.
Alternative to mental hospital treatment: I. Conceptual
model, treatment program, and clinical evaluation.
Arch Gen Psychiatry.
1980;
37
392-397
7
Pasamanick B, Scarpitti F R, Lefton M et al.
Home vs. hospital care for schizophrenics.
J Am Med Ass.
1964;
187
89-93
8
Donald G, Langsley M D, Machotka P et al.
Avoiding mental hospital admission: A follow-up study.
Am J Psychiat.
1971;
127
1391-1394
9
Fenton F R, Tessier L, Struening E L.
A comparative trial of home and hospital psychiatric care:
one-year follow up.
Arch Gen Psychiatry.
1979;
36
1073-1079
10
Hoult J, Rosen A, Reynolds I.
Community oriented treatment compared to psychiatric hospital
oriented treatment.
Soc Sci Med.
1984;
18
1005-1010
11
Dean C, Phillips J, Gadd E M et al.
Comparison of community based service with hospital based
service for people with acute, severe psychiatric illness.
Brit Med J.
1993;
304
473-476
12
Kay S R, Opler L A, Lindemeyer J P.
The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS): Rationale
and standardisation.
Br J Psychiatry.
1989;
155
59-65
13
Hamilton M.
A rating scale for depression.
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry.
1960;
23
56-62
14
Andreas S, Harfst T, Dirmaier J et al.
A Psychometric evaluation of the German version of the
„Health of the Nation Outcome Scales, HoNOS-D”: on the
feasibility and reliability of clinician-performed measurements of severity
in
patients with mental disorders.
Psychopathology.
2007;
40
116-125
15 Galway N W. Introduction to mixed modelling. Beyond regression and
analysis of variance.. San Francisco: Wiley; 2006
16
Kilian R, Angermeyer M C.
The effects of antipsychotic treatment on quality of life of
schizophrenic patients under naturalistic treatment conditions: An application
of random effect regression models and propensity scores in an observational
prospective trial.
Quality of Life Research.
2004;
14
1275-1289
17 Shenyang G, Fraser M W. Propensity score analysis: Statistical methods and
applications.. Newbury Park: Sage Publications; 2009
18
Brimblecombe N, O'Sullivan G H.
Diagnosis, assessments and admissions from a community
treatment team.
Psychiatric Bulletin.
1999;
23
72-74
19
Tomar R, Brimblecombe N, O'Sullivan G H.
Service innovations: Home treatment for first-episode
psychosis.
Psychiatric Bulletin.
2003;
27
148-151
20
Smyth M G, Hoult J.
The home treatment enigma.
British Med J.
2000;
320
305-309
21
König H H, Heinrich S, Heider D et al.
Das Regionale Psychiatriebudget (RPB): Ein Modell für
das neue pauschalierende Entgeltsystem psychiatrischer Krankenhausleistungen?
Analyse der Kosten und Effekte des RPB nach 3,5 Jahren Laufzeit.
Psychiat Prax.
2010;
37
34-42
Dr. med. Karel Frasch
Klinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie II der
Universität Ulm am BKH Günzburg
Ludwig-Heilmeyer-Straße 2
89312 Günzburg
Email: karel.frasch@bkh-guenzburg.de