Clinical Case Management for Patients with Schizophrenia with High Care Needs

The aim of this study is to establish the effectiveness of a clinical case management (CM) programme compared to a standard treatment programme (STP) in patients with schizophrenia. Patients for the CM programme were consecutively selected among patients in the STP with schizophrenia who had poor functioning. Seventy-five patients were admitted to the CM programme and were matched to 75 patients in the STP. Patients were evaluated at baseline and at 1 year follow-up. At baseline, patients in the CM programme showed lower levels of clinical and psychosocial functioning and more care needs than patients in the STP. Both treatment programmes were effective in maintaining contact with services but the CM programme did not show advantages over the STP on outcomes. Differences between groups at baseline may be masking the effects of CM at one year follow-up. A longer follow-up may be required to evaluate the real CM practices effect

Ten year outcomes of participants in the REACT (Randomised Evaluation of Assertive Community Treatment in North London) study.

BackgroundA previous randomised controlled trial that investigated Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) in the UK (the REACT Study) found no clinical advantage over usual care delivered by Community Mental Health Teams (CMHTs) at 18 and 36 month follow-ups. No studies have investigated long term clinical and social outcomes for patients receiving ACT.MethodWe investigated inpatient service use, social outcomes, service contact and adverse events for the 251 REACT study participants 10 years after randomisation through case note review. Data were analysed using regression models adjusted for original treatment group allocation and changes in treatment group.ResultsWe found no statistically significant differences in outcomes by original treatment group over the 10 years. Those whose care remained with ACT, or transferred to ACT or forensic services, had more inpatient days over the 10 years (coefficient 223, 95% CI 83 to 363, p =0.002) than those whose care remained with the CMHTs or were discharged to primary care. Being subject to a Community Treatment Order was associated with a greater chance of being under ACT at 10 year follow-up (OR 6.39, 95% CI 2.98 to 13.70, p <0.001).ConclusionsThe ACT teams in this study showed no clinical advantage over usual care provided by CMHTs at 10 year follow-up. We also found that the ACT teams accrued patients from the original study sample who had more complex needs than those who remained with or transferred to the CMHTs or primary care during this period. Further well conducted trials are needed to identify the most cost-effective approaches to supporting successful community living and optimum long term outcomes for this group

Associated factors to serious infections in a large cohort of juvenile-onset systemic lupus erythematosus from Lupus Registry (RELESSER).

Objective: To assess the incidence of serious infection (SI) and associated factors in a large juvenile-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (jSLE) retrospective cohort. Methods: All patients in the Spanish Rheumatology Society Lupus Registry (RELESSER) who meet =4 ACR-97 SLE criteria and disease onset <18 years old (jSLE), were retrospectively investigated for SI (defined as either the need for hospitalization with antibacterial therapy for a potentially fatal infection or death caused by the infection). Standardized SI rate was calculated per 100 patient years. Patients with and without SI were compared. Bivariate and multivariate logistic and Cox regression models were built to calculate associated factors to SI and relative risks. Results: A total of 353 jSLE patients were included: 88.7% female, 14.3 years (± 2.9) of age at diagnosis, 16.0 years (± 9.3) of disease duration and 31.5 years (±10.5) at end of follow-up. A total of 104 (29.5%) patients suffered 205 SI (1, 55.8%; 2-5, 38.4%; and =6, 5.8%). Incidence rate was 3.7 (95%CI: 3.2–4.2) SI per 100 patient years. Respiratory location and bacterial infections were the most frequent. Higher number of SLE classification criteria, SLICC/ACR DI score and immunosuppressants use were associated to the presence of SI. Associated factors to shorter time to first infection were higher number of SLE criteria, splenectomy and immunosuppressants use. Conclusions: The risk of SI in jSLE patients is significant and higher than aSLE. It is associated to higher number of SLE criteria, damage accrual, some immunosuppressants and splenectomy

The management of acute venous thromboembolism in clinical practice. Results from the European PREFER in VTE Registry

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in Europe. Data from real-world registries are necessary, as clinical trials do not represent the full spectrum of VTE patients seen in clinical practice. We aimed to document the epidemiology, management and outcomes of VTE using data from a large, observational database. PREFER in VTE was an international, non-interventional disease registry conducted between January 2013 and July 2015 in primary and secondary care across seven European countries. Consecutive patients with acute VTE were documented and followed up over 12 months. PREFER in VTE included 3,455 patients with a mean age of 60.8 ± 17.0 years. Overall, 53.0 % were male. The majority of patients were assessed in the hospital setting as inpatients or outpatients (78.5 %). The diagnosis was deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) in 59.5 % and pulmonary embolism (PE) in 40.5 %. The most common comorbidities were the various types of cardiovascular disease (excluding hypertension; 45.5 %), hypertension (42.3 %) and dyslipidaemia (21.1 %). Following the index VTE, a large proportion of patients received initial therapy with heparin (73.2 %), almost half received a vitamin K antagonist (48.7 %) and nearly a quarter received a DOAC (24.5 %). Almost a quarter of all presentations were for recurrent VTE, with &gt;80 % of previous episodes having occurred more than 12 months prior to baseline. In conclusion, PREFER in VTE has provided contemporary insights into VTE patients and their real-world management, including their baseline characteristics, risk factors, disease history, symptoms and signs, initial therapy and outcomes

Clinical Case Management for Patients with Schizophrenia with High Care Needs

The aim of this study is to establish the effectiveness of a clinical case management (CM) programme compared to a standard treatment programme (STP) in patients with schizophrenia. Patients for the CM programme were consecutively selected among patients in the STP with schizophrenia who had poor functioning. Seventy-five patients were admitted to the CM programme and were matched to 75 patients in the STP. Patients were evaluated at baseline and at 1 year follow-up. At baseline, patients in the CM programme showed lower levels of clinical and psychosocial functioning and more care needs than patients in the STP. Both treatment programmes were effective in maintaining contact with services but the CM programme did not show advantages over the STP on outcomes. Differences between groups at baseline may be masking the effects of CM at one year follow-up. A longer follow-up may be required to evaluate the real CM practices effect

Clinical Case Management for Patients with Schizophrenia with High Care Needs

The aim of this study is to establish the effectiveness of a clinical case management (CM) programme compared to a standard treatment programme (STP) in patients with schizophrenia. Patients for the CM programme were consecutively selected among patients in the STP with schizophrenia who had poor functioning. Seventy-five patients were admitted to the CM programme and were matched to 75 patients in the STP. Patients were evaluated at baseline and at 1 year follow-up. At baseline, patients in the CM programme showed lower levels of clinical and psychosocial functioning and more care needs than patients in the STP. Both treatment programmes were effective in maintaining contact with services but the CM programme did not show advantages over the STP on outcomes. Differences between groups at baseline may be masking the effects of CM at one year follow-up. A longer follow-up may be required to evaluate the real CM practices effect