[指南建议、护理结构和个人因素对严重精神病患者使用心理社会疗法的影响]。

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q4 PSYCHIATRY Psychiatrische Praxis Pub Date : 2024-04-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-09 DOI:10.1055/a-2133-3527
Sarah Fritz, Markus Kösters, Andreas Allgöwer, Thomas Becker, Reinhold Kilian, Uta Gühne, Steffi G Riedel-Heller, Alkomiet Hasan, Peter Falkai, Klemens Ajayi, Jessica Baumgärtner, Peter Brieger, Karel Frasch, Stephan Heres, Markus Jäger, Andreas Küthmann, Albert Putzhammer, Bertram Schneeweiß, Michael Schwarz, Johanna Breilmann
{"title":"[指南建议、护理结构和个人因素对严重精神病患者使用心理社会疗法的影响]。","authors":"Sarah Fritz, Markus Kösters, Andreas Allgöwer, Thomas Becker, Reinhold Kilian, Uta Gühne, Steffi G Riedel-Heller, Alkomiet Hasan, Peter Falkai, Klemens Ajayi, Jessica Baumgärtner, Peter Brieger, Karel Frasch, Stephan Heres, Markus Jäger, Andreas Küthmann, Albert Putzhammer, Bertram Schneeweiß, Michael Schwarz, Johanna Breilmann","doi":"10.1055/a-2133-3527","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The influence of guideline recommendations and other factors on the utilization of psychosocial interventions in people with severe mental illness was examined.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from a cross-sectional study of 397 people with severe mental illness were analysed descriptively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients are less likely to receive therapies with a strong recommendation compared to other levels of recommendation. Various other factors are diffusely associated with utilization rates, but no ubiquitous predictors could be identified across all therapies.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Current practice in the use of psychosocial interventions does not follow guideline recommendation strength. Interventions with strong recommendations are probably not available across services. Consequently, routine practice is not able to follow guideline recommendations according to their strength. Other consistent predictors could not be identified.</p>","PeriodicalId":20711,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatrische Praxis","volume":" ","pages":"129-138"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Influence of guideline recommendations, care structures and individual factors on the use of psychosocial therapies in severely mentally ill people].\",\"authors\":\"Sarah Fritz, Markus Kösters, Andreas Allgöwer, Thomas Becker, Reinhold Kilian, Uta Gühne, Steffi G Riedel-Heller, Alkomiet Hasan, Peter Falkai, Klemens Ajayi, Jessica Baumgärtner, Peter Brieger, Karel Frasch, Stephan Heres, Markus Jäger, Andreas Küthmann, Albert Putzhammer, Bertram Schneeweiß, Michael Schwarz, Johanna Breilmann\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2133-3527\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The influence of guideline recommendations and other factors on the utilization of psychosocial interventions in people with severe mental illness was examined.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from a cross-sectional study of 397 people with severe mental illness were analysed descriptively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients are less likely to receive therapies with a strong recommendation compared to other levels of recommendation. Various other factors are diffusely associated with utilization rates, but no ubiquitous predictors could be identified across all therapies.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Current practice in the use of psychosocial interventions does not follow guideline recommendation strength. Interventions with strong recommendations are probably not available across services. Consequently, routine practice is not able to follow guideline recommendations according to their strength. Other consistent predictors could not be identified.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20711,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychiatrische Praxis\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"129-138\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychiatrische Praxis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2133-3527\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/10/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychiatrische Praxis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2133-3527","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:研究指南建议和其他因素对严重精神疾病患者使用心理社会干预的影响。方法:对397名严重精神疾病患者的横断面研究数据进行描述性分析。结果:与其他推荐级别相比,患者接受强烈推荐的治疗的可能性较小。各种其他因素与利用率普遍相关,但在所有疗法中都无法确定普遍存在的预测因素。结论:目前使用心理社会干预措施的做法不符合指南建议的强度。带有强烈建议的干预措施可能不适用于所有服务。因此,常规做法无法根据指导方针建议的强度来遵循这些建议。无法确定其他一致的预测因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[Influence of guideline recommendations, care structures and individual factors on the use of psychosocial therapies in severely mentally ill people].

Objective: The influence of guideline recommendations and other factors on the utilization of psychosocial interventions in people with severe mental illness was examined.

Methods: Data from a cross-sectional study of 397 people with severe mental illness were analysed descriptively.

Results: Patients are less likely to receive therapies with a strong recommendation compared to other levels of recommendation. Various other factors are diffusely associated with utilization rates, but no ubiquitous predictors could be identified across all therapies.

Conclusion: Current practice in the use of psychosocial interventions does not follow guideline recommendation strength. Interventions with strong recommendations are probably not available across services. Consequently, routine practice is not able to follow guideline recommendations according to their strength. Other consistent predictors could not be identified.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Psychiatrische Praxis
Psychiatrische Praxis PSYCHIATRY-
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
9.10%
发文量
103
期刊介绍: Sozialpsychiatrisch orientiert Aktuelle Originalarbeiten und fundierte Übersichten Pro-Kontra-Debatten zu Brennpunktthemen Informative Fallbeispiele Vorstellung internationaler Studien
期刊最新文献
[Housing Situation of People with Severe Mental Illnesses]. [Institutionalised Pre-School Childcare and Reported Maltreatment: A Survey in East Germany]. [What does an Ideal Day Centre Look Like? The User Perspective on Day-Structuring Programmes for People with Mental Illness]. [Health Literacy, Contact Points, Unmet Subjective Needs and Treatment Satisfaction of those Affected by Long Covid with Long-Lasting Neuropsychiatric Symptoms]. ["Change Agents" Or "Peer Washing": Can Peer Support Workers Contribute To The Transformation Of Psychiatric Institutions?]
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1