Abstract
Abstract
Background
Italy can be viewed as a laboratory to assess the quality of mental healthcare delivered in a community-oriented system, especially for severe mental disorders, such as personality disorders. Although initiatives based on clinical indicators for assessing the quality of mental healthcare have been developed by transnational-organisations, there is still no widespread practice of measuring the quality of care pathways delivered to patients with severe mental disorders in a community-oriented system, especially using administrative healthcare databases. The aim of the study is to evaluate the quality of care delivered to patients with personality disorders taken-in-care by mental health services of four Italian regions (Lombardy, Emilia-Romagna, Lazio, Sicily).
Methods
A set of thirty-three clinical indicators, concerning accessibility, appropriateness, continuity, and safety of care, was implemented using regional healthcare utilization databases, containing data on mental health treatments and diagnosis, hospital admissions, outpatient interventions and exams and drug prescriptions.
RESULTS
31,688 prevalent patients with personality disorders treated in 2015 were identified, of whom 2,331 newly taken-in-care. One-in-10 patients received a standardized assessment, the treatment discontinuity affected half of the cases. 12.7% of prevalent patients received at least one hospitalization, 10.6% in the newly taken-in-care cohort. 6-out-of-10 patients had contact with community-services within 14 days from hospital discharge. Access to psychotherapy and psychoeducational treatments was low and delivered with a low intensity. The median of psychosocial interventions per person-year was 19.1 and 9.4, respectively, in prevalent and newly taken-in-care cases. Nearly 50% of patients received pharmacological treatments.
Conclusions
Healthcare utilization databases were used to systematically evaluate and assess service delivery across regional mental health systems; suggesting that in Italy the public mental health services provide to individuals with personality disorders suboptimal treatment paths.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Psychiatry and Mental health,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy,Pshychiatric Mental Health
Reference50 articles.
1. Gunderson JG. Borderline personality disorder: ontogeny of a diagnosis. Am J Psychiatry. 2009;166:530–9.
2. Theodore M. A sociocultural conception of the borderline personality disorder epidemic. Contemporary directions in psychopathology: scientific foundations of the DSM-V and ICD-11. New York, NY, US: The Guilford Press; 2010. 111–23.
3. Álvarez-Tomás I, Ruiz J, Guilera G, Bados A. Long-term clinical and functional course of borderline personality disorder: a meta-analysis of prospective studies. Eur Psychiatry. 2019;56:75–83.
4. Goodman M, Roiff T, Oakes AH, Paris J. Suicidal risk and management in borderline personality disorder. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2012;14:79–85.
5. Pompili M, Girardi P, Ruberto A, Tatarelli R. Suicide in borderline personality disorder: a meta-analysis. Nord J Psychiatry. 2005;59:319–24.
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献