Skip to content

The CORE Service Improvement Programme for mental health Crisis Resolution Teams: results from a cluster-randomised trial

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  • Brynmor LLoyd Evans
  • Louise Marston
  • Danielle Lamb
  • Oliver Mason
  • Gareth Ambler
  • Rachael Hunter
  • Sarah Sullivan
  • Claire Henderson
  • Steve Onyett
  • Elaine Johnston
  • Nicola Morant
  • Fiona Nolan
  • Kathleen Kelly
  • Marina Christoforou
  • Kate Fullarton
  • Rebecca Forsyth
  • Michael Davidson
  • Jonathan Piotrowski
  • Edward Mundy
  • Gary Bond
  • Sonia Johnson
Original languageEnglish
JournalBritish Journal of Psychiatry
DateAccepted/In press - 3 Jan 2019

Abstract

Background: Crisis Resolution Teams (CRTs) offer brief, intensive home treatment for people experiencing mental health crisis. CRT implementation is highly variable; positive trial outcomes have not been reproduced in scaled up CRT care.
Aims: To evaluate a one-year programme to improve CRTs’ model fidelity in a non-blind, cluster randomised trial.

Methods: Fifteen CRTs in England received an intervention, informed by the US Implementing Evidence Based Practice project, involving support from a CRT Facilitator, online implementation resources and regular team fidelity reviews. Ten control CRTs received no additional support. The primary outcome was service user satisfaction, measured by the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ-8), completed by fifteen service users per team at CRT discharge (N=375). Secondary outcomes: CRT model fidelity, continuity of care, staff wellbeing, inpatient admissions and bed use and CRT readmissions were also evaluated.

Results: All CRTs were retained in the trial. Median follow-up CSQ-8 score was 28 in each group: the adjusted average in the intervention group was higher than in the control group by 0.97 (CI-1.02, 2.97) but this was not significant (p=0.34). There were fewer inpatient admissions, lower inpatient bed use and better staff psychological health in intervention teams. Model fidelity rose in most intervention teams and was significantly higher than in control teams at follow up. There were no significant effects for other outcomes.

Conclusions: The CRT Service Improvement Programme did not achieve its primary aim of improving service user satisfaction. It showed some promise in improving CRT model fidelity and reducing acute inpatient admissions.

    Research areas

  • acute care, crisis resolution, service improvement, mental health, randomised controlled trial

Download statistics

No data available

Documents

Documents

  • Full-text PDF (accepted author manuscript)

    Rights statement: This is the author accepted manuscript (AAM). The final published version (version of record) will be made available online via Cambridge University Press . Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher.

    Accepted author manuscript, 394 KB, PDF document

View research connections

Related faculties, schools or groups