PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 12841590

Implementing evidence-based practices for people with severe mental illness.

Abstract

Persons with severe mental illnesses (SMI) often lack access to effective treatments. The authors describe the Implementing Evidence-Based Practices (EBPs) Project, designed to increase access for people with SMI to empirically supported interventions. The EBP Project aims to improve access through development of standardized implementation packages, created in collaboration with different stakeholders, including clinicians, consumers, family members, clinical supervisors, program leaders, and mental health authorities. The background and philosophy of the EBP Project are described, including the six EBPs identified for initial package development: collaborative psychopharmacology, assertive community treatment, family psychoeducation, supported employment, illness management and recovery skills, and integrated dual disorders treatment. The components of the implementation packages are described as well as the planned phases of the project. Improving access to EBPs for consumers with SMI may enhance outcomes in a cost-effective manner, helping them pursue their personal recovery goals with the support of professionals, family, and friends.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Kim T Mueser, William C Torrey, David Lynde, Patricia Singer, Robert E Drake. 2003. Implementing evidence-based practices for people with severe mental illness.. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445503027003007

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Performance-based funding of supported employment for persons with severe mental illness: vocational rehabilitation and employment staff perspectives.

Vocational rehabilitation (VR) supervisors and counselors (n = 35) as well as supported employment (SE) program managers and employment specialists (n = 26) were enrolled in a 12-month evaluation comparing two models of funding services for persons with severe mental illness: fee-for-service and results-based funding (RBF). Quantitative measures of job satisfaction and preference for funding method were obtained prospectively on a quarterly basis, and SE staff activity logs were collected monthly. Qualitative data were collected using a series of focus groups conducted at the conclusion of the study. Despite recording a substantial increase in semi-annualized VR billing charges when using RBF (45-49%), SE staff expressed less satisfaction with RBF over time. Staff raised concerns about increased financial risks and pressures to achieve job placements under RBF. Vocational rehabilitation staff were consistently more satisfied with RBF, expressing particular satisfaction with perceived effectiveness and the payment authorization process. Both VR and SE staff expressed some reservations about RBF, primarily concerning possible pressures for adverse client selection.

Employment, Supported↗