PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Susan V Eisen

Publications and source records attributed to Susan V Eisen.

9 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2007

Translation and cultural adaptation of a mental health outcome measure: the BASIS-R(c).

Culturally and linguistically appropriate outcome measures are needed to address the needs of Latino consumers of mental health services. The revised Behavior and Symptom Identification Scale (BASIS-R(c)) is an English-language consumer self-report measure designed to assess outcome of behavioral health or substance abuse treatment. This study sought to develop a culturally and linguistically appropriate version of the BASIS-R(c) for Spanish-speaking Latinos. To achieve this goal, the English instrument was translated and adapted into Spanish by an international bilingual committee and tested in four focus groups and 45 cognitive interviews with Puerto Ricans, Dominicans, and Mexicans living in the United States and Puerto Rico. Focus groups and cognitive interviews provided qualitative and quantitative information about the instrument's content and format, and respondents' understanding of the instructions, questionnaire items, time frame, and response options. Respondents' ratings of the clarity and importance of each item were also obtained. Analyses of focus group and cognitive interview data identified items that were confusing or difficult for participants. Findings suggest that the Spanish version of the BASIS-R(c) incorporated the cultural diversity of the three groups of Latinos in this study without compromising the validity of the English version of the BASIS.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2006

Comparison of self-report and clinician-rated measures of psychiatric symptoms and functioning in predicting 1-year hospital readmission.

This study compared the self-report Behavior and Symptom Identification Scale (BASIS-32) and clinician-rated Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) in their ability to predict a measure of psychiatric outcome, 1-year psychiatric hospital readmission. BASIS-32 and GAF were completed at admission for 1034 patients in an inpatient psychiatric facility. Multiple informants analysis was used to determine the difference between the two in predicting readmission within 1 year. We also examined sensitivity, specificity, and predictive value positive of the two measures, and whether self-report added information above clinician rating in predicting outcome. While the odds of 1-year readmission decreased with increasing BASIS-32 score, there was no association between change in GAF score and 1-year readmission. Although neither measure used alone demonstrated high predictive value, using both scores improved predictive ability over using clinician rating alone. In this setting, self-report was better than clinician rating in predicting psychiatric outcome. Differences between the two in relation to other outcomes need to be examined.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2006

Reliability and validity of the BASIS-24 Mental Health Survey for Whites, African-Americans, and Latinos.

Increasing racial and ethnic diversity calls for mental health assessment instruments that are appropriate, reliable, and valid for the wide range of cultures that comprise the current US population. However, most assessment instruments have not been tested on diverse samples. This study assessed psychometric properties and sensitivity to change of the revised Behavior and Symptom Identification Scale (BASIS-24) among the three largest race/ethnicity groups in the USA: Whites, African-Americans, and Latinos. BASIS-24 assessments were obtained for 2436 inpatients and 2975 outpatients treated at one of 27 mental health and/or substance abuse programs. Confirmatory factor analysis and several psychometric tests supported the factor structure, reliability, concurrent validity, and sensitivity of the instrument within each race/ethnicity group, although discriminant validity may be weaker for African-Americans and Latinos than for Whites. Further research is needed to test and validate assessment instruments with other race/ethnicity groups.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2004

The Revised Behavior and Symptom Identification Scale (BASIS-R): reliability and validity.

BACKGROUND: To assess outcomes of health services, providers need brief, responsive, reliable, and valid measures that can be implemented in clinical settings with minimal cost and burden. The Behavior and Symptom Identification Scale (BASIS-32) is a self-report measure developed in 1984 to assess mental health treatment outcomes. During the past 3 years, multiple methods were used to revise the instrument to improve reliability, validity, and applicability to diverse groups of mental health service recipients. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to field test the revised instrument, make further changes based on analysis of the field test data, and assess reliability and validity of the final version (BASIS-24). METHODS: A field test was implemented at 27 treatment sites across the United States. A total of 2656 inpatients and 3222 outpatients participated. Factor analytic methods, classic test theory, and item response theory modeling were used to select the most discriminating, nonredundant items for inclusion in the final version of the instrument and to assess its reliability and validity. Item response theory modeling was used to score the instrument. RESULTS: The final instrument includes 24 items assessing 6 domains: depression/ functioning, interpersonal relationships, self-harm, emotional lability, psychosis, and substance abuse. Test-retest and internal consistency reliability were acceptable. Tests of construct and discriminant validity supported the instrument's ability to discriminate groups expected to differ in mental health status, and its correlation with other measures of mental health. CONCLUSIONS: Analyses of the BASIS-24 supported its reliability and validity for assessing mental health status from the patient's perspective.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2003

Guideline recommendations for treatment of schizophrenia: the impact of managed care.

BACKGROUND: Medicaid-managed care has been shown to reduce the number and length of psychiatric hospitalizations, but little is known about the clinical and social consequences of such managed care programs. The purpose of this study was to compare the treatment of schizophrenia for disabled Medicaid beneficiaries who were and were not enrolled in managed care. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study of patients who sought care for a psychiatric crisis from June 7, 1997, to May 13, 1999. Patients were followed up for 6 months. Inpatient and outpatient mental health facilities in Massachusetts were studied. The participants included 420 adult Medicaid beneficiaries, aged 24 to 64 years, who were treated for schizophrenia; 784 eligible beneficiaries were originally contacted and invited to participate (53.6% response). A private managed behavioral health care organization administered the Medicaid mental health benefit for about half the patients in the study. The other half were enrolled in the dually insured fee-for-service Medicare/Medicaid plan. The main outcome measures were adherence to the Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team treatment recommendations from inpatient and outpatient medical records, self-reported quality of interpersonal interactions between patient and clinician, self-reported care experiences and outcomes, and clinician-reported outcomes. RESULTS: There were no differences between the managed care plan and the unmanaged fee-for-service plan in adherence to the schizophrenia treatment guidelines. However, much outpatient care in both programs was inconsistent with treatment guidelines. Inpatient treatment was far more likely to conform to guidelines than outpatient treatment. Patient ratings of their care were positive and not different between plans. Clinical outcome and health-related quality of life were not different between plans. CONCLUSIONS: A major change in Massachusetts in the way mental health care is organized and financed had neither a negative nor a positive effect on care quality. However, adherence to nationally accepted guidelines for care was only modest, suggesting a need to improve the delivery of treatment to the most disabled highest-risk adults with schizophrenia.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

The influence of patient characteristics on ratings of managed behavioral health care.

Despite current emphasis on consumer-based performance measures, little is known about factors that influence consumer ratings of behavioral health care. This study examines the influence of patient characteristics, health care use, and insurance coverage on patients' ratings of their managed behavioral health care in both commercial and public plans. Older and healthier patients rated their behavioral health care and health plan more highly than did other patients. Patients with less education and those whose insurance paid all costs of care gave consistently higher plan ratings. Women and frequent users enrolled in commercial plans gave more positive care ratings. After adjusting for enrollee characteristics and coverage, there were no differences between ratings of patients in commercial and public plans. These results are consistent with other research that illustrates the importance of adjusting health care ratings for patient characteristics when comparing plans.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2002

Assessing consumer perceptions of inpatient psychiatric treatment: the perceptions of care survey.

BACKGROUND: Consumer perceptions of behavioral health care are widely recognized as important quality indicators. This article reports the development and use of the Perceptions of Care (PoC) survey, a standardized public domain measure of consumer perceptions of the quality of inpatient mental health or substance abuse care. The goals were to develop a low-cost, low-burden survey that would address important quality domains, allow for interprogram comparisons and national benchmarks, be useful for quality improvement purposes, and meet accreditation and payer requirements. METHODS: The sample was composed of 6,972 patients treated in 14 inpatient behavioral health or substance abuse treatment programs. The PoC survey was given to patients by program staff in the 24-hour period before discharge. RESULTS: Aggregate reports and ratings of care identified areas that are highly evaluated by consumers, as well as areas that provide opportunities for quality improvement. Factor analysis identified four domains of care, and a 100-point score was developed for each domain. Regression analyses identified significant predictors of perceptions of care for use in computing risk-adjusted scores. Unadjusted and adjusted scores were presented to demonstrate the impact of risk adjustment on quality of care scores and relative ranking of programs. Examples were given of how programs used survey results to improve the quality of care. DISCUSSION: Results demonstrated that the PoC survey is sensitive to detecting differences among inpatient behavioral health programs and can be useful in guiding quality improvement efforts. However, risk adjustment is important for appropriate interpretation of results.

Behavioral Medicine↗