Testing the Integral Model of treatment motivation in outpatients with severe mental illness

The current study tested the Integral Model of treatment motivation (IM) in a sample of 294 outpatients with severe mental illness, using structural equation modelling. The obtained structural model was not consistent with original theory, nor was the model invariant across time and patient groups (psychotic disorders and personality disorders). The patient’s perceived suitability of treatment, perceived costs of treatment and outcome expectancy were most strongly associated with motivation and treatment engagement. The model explained between 22 and 86% of variance in clinical outcomes, depending on the timing of the assessment. Currently, the IM does not constitute a robust framework for patterns through which patients become motivated to engage in treatment, but does explain substantial amounts of variance in clinical outcomes. The future potential of IM as a basis for interventions in the mental health care is discussed, including suggestions for subsequent research and potential alterations of the IM to improve its utility for application in clinical practice

Motivation and treatment engagement intervention trial (MotivaTe-IT): The effects of motivation feedback to clinicians on treatment engagement in patients with severe mental illness

Background: Treatment disengagement and non-completion poses a major problem for the successful treatment of patients with severe mental illness. Motivation for treatment has long been proposed as a major determinant of treatment engagement, but exact mechanisms remain unclear. This current study serves three purposes: 1) to determine whether a feedback intervention based on the patients' motivation for treatment is effective at improving treatment engagement (TE) of severe mentally ill patients in outpatient psychiatric treatment, 2) to gather insight into motivational processes and pos

The effects of motivation feedback in patients with severe mental illness: a cluster randomized controlled trial

Eline C Jochems,1,2 Christina M van der Feltz-Cornelis,1–3 Arno van Dam,3,4 Hugo J Duivenvoorden,5 Cornelis L Mulder1,6 1Department of Psychiatry, Epidemiological and Social Psychiatric Research Institute, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; 2GGz Breburg, Top Clinical Center for Body, Mind and Health, Tilburg, the Netherlands; 3Tilburg University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Tranzo Department, Tilburg, the Netherlands; 4GGZ Westelijk Noord Brabant, Bergen op Zoom, the Netherlands; 5Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; 6BavoEuropoort, Parnassia Psychiatric Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of providing clinicians with regular feedback on the patient’s motivation for treatment in increasing treatment engagement in patients with severe mental illness.Methods: Design: cluster randomized controlled trial (Dutch Trials Registry NTR2968). Participants: adult outpatients with a primary diagnosis of a psychotic disorder or a personality disorder and their clinicians, treated in 12 community mental health teams (the clusters) of two mental health institutions in the Netherlands. Interventions: monthly motivation feedback (MF) generated by clinicians additional to treatment as usual (TAU) and TAU by the community mental health teams. Primary outcome: treatment engagement at patient level, assessed at 12 months by clinicians. Randomization: teams were allocated to MF or TAU by a computerized randomization program that randomized each team to a single treatment by blocks of varying size. All participants within these teams received similar treatment. Clinicians and patients were not blind to treatment allocation at the 12-month assessment.Results: The 294 randomized patients (148 MF, 146 TAU) and 57 clinicians (29 MF, 28 TAU) of 12 teams (6 MF, 6 TAU) were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle. No statistically significant differences between treatment groups on treatment engagement were found (adjusted mean difference =0.1, 95% confidence interval =-2.2 to 2.3, P=0.96, d=0). Preplanned ancillary analyses showed statistically significant interaction effects between treatment group and primary diagnosis on treatment motivation and quality of life (secondary outcomes), which were beneficial for patients with a primary diagnosis of a personality disorder but not for those with a psychotic disorder. There were no reports of adverse events.Conclusion: The current findings imply that monitoring and discussing the patient’s motivation is insufficient to improve motivation and treatment engagement, and suggests that more elaborate interventions for severe mental illness patients are needed. Keywords: randomized controlled trial, feedback, motivation, adherence, psychotic disorders, personality disorder