16 research outputs found

    Patterns of Recovery from Severe Mental Illness: A Pilot Study of Outcomes

    Get PDF
    We performed a pilot study examining the patterns of recovery from severe mental illness in a model integrated service delivery system using measures from the Milestones of Recovery Scale (MORS), a valid and reliable measure of recovery outcomes which ranges from 1 to 8 (8 levels). For purposes of presentation, we constructed an aggregate MORS (6 levels) where the levels are described as follows: (1) extreme risk; (2) unengaged, poorly self-coordinating; (3) engaged, poorly self-coordinating; (4) coping and rehabilitating; (5) early recovery, and (6) self reliant. We analyzed MORS data on individuals followed over time from The Village in Long Beach, California (658 observations). Using Markov Chains, we estimated origin-destination transition probabilities, simulating recovery outcomes for 100 months. Our models suggest that after 12 months only 8% of “extreme risk” clients remain such. Over 40% have moved to “engaged, poorly self-coordinating.” After 2 years, almost half of the initial “extreme Risk” clients are “coping/rehabilitating”, “early recovery” or “Self reliant.” Most gains occur within 2 years

    Risk Adjustment of Florida Mental Health Outcomes Data: Concepts, Methods, and Results

    No full text
    This article discusses outcome evaluation systems for mental health programs. It reviews and critically evaluates design and analysis methods for strengthening the validity of such uncontrolled comparisons. The article examines methods for statistically adjusting preexisting groups, now referred to as risk adjustment or case-mix adjustment, and offers guidelines for determining when this procedure is appropriate. Then, analyses on two dependent variables—a global rating of functioning and a consumer satisfaction measure—available from an outcomes evaluation system currently underway in Florida are used to demonstrate the proposed method of risk adjustment. Results for 24 providers of mental health services showed that while risk adjustment only made a small difference in the overall provider rankings, the ranking of some specific providers changed considerably. The article concludes with a discussion of the implications of this research
    corecore