Participants' and staffs' evaluation of the Illness Management and Recovery program: a randomized clinical trial

Helle Stentoft Dalum; Anna Kristine Waldemar; Lisa Korsbek; Carsten Hjorthøj; John Hagel Mikkelsen; Karin Thomsen; Kristen Kistrup; Mette Olander; Jane Lindschou; Merete Nordentoft; Lene Falgaard Eplov

doi:10.1080/09638237.2016.1244716

Participants' and staffs' evaluation of the Illness Management and Recovery program: a randomized clinical trial

Helle Stentoft Dalum, Anna Kristine Waldemar, Lisa Korsbek, Carsten Hjorthøj, John Hagel Mikkelsen, Karin Thomsen, Kristen Kistrup, Mette Olander, Jane Lindschou, Merete Nordentoft, Lene Falgaard Eplov

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Psychoeducational interventions for people with severe mental illness are developed to enable them to manage their illness effectively to improve prognosis and recovery.

AIM: The aim was to investigate the benefits and harms of the Illness Management and Recovery (IMR) program among people with severe mental illness in Denmark. IMR builds among other approaches on a psychoeducational approach.

METHODS: A randomized, multi-center, clinical trial of the IMR program compared with treatment as usual among 198 participants with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder investigating outcomes related to illness self-management assessed by the IMR scale, recovery, hope and participants' satisfaction at the end of the 9 months intervention period.

RESULTS: No statistical differences were seen between the two groups regarding illness self-management, hope, recovery, or satisfaction with treatment.

CONCLUSIONS: IMR appears not to be better than treatment as usual in any of the outcomes. Further studies with a longer follow-up period, better assessments of recovery and a systematic review of the existing trials are needed to assess if the program is effective.

Original language	English
Journal	Aging & Mental Health
Volume	27
Issue number	1
Pages (from-to)	30-37
Number of pages	8
ISSN	1360-7863
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1080/09638237.2016.1244716
Publication status	Published - 2 Jan 2018
Externally published	Yes

Keywords

Journal Article

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1080/09638237.2016.1244716

Cite this

Dalum, H. S., Waldemar, A. K., Korsbek, L., Hjorthøj, C., Mikkelsen, J. H., Thomsen, K., Kistrup, K., Olander, M., Lindschou, J., Nordentoft, M., & Falgaard Eplov, L. (2018). Participants' and staffs' evaluation of the Illness Management and Recovery program: a randomized clinical trial. Aging & Mental Health, 27(1), 30-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638237.2016.1244716

@article{c2eed7beefeb4c96975f07b658c50380,

title = "Participants' and staffs' evaluation of the Illness Management and Recovery program: a randomized clinical trial",

abstract = "BACKGROUND: Psychoeducational interventions for people with severe mental illness are developed to enable them to manage their illness effectively to improve prognosis and recovery.AIM: The aim was to investigate the benefits and harms of the Illness Management and Recovery (IMR) program among people with severe mental illness in Denmark. IMR builds among other approaches on a psychoeducational approach.METHODS: A randomized, multi-center, clinical trial of the IMR program compared with treatment as usual among 198 participants with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder investigating outcomes related to illness self-management assessed by the IMR scale, recovery, hope and participants' satisfaction at the end of the 9 months intervention period.RESULTS: No statistical differences were seen between the two groups regarding illness self-management, hope, recovery, or satisfaction with treatment.CONCLUSIONS: IMR appears not to be better than treatment as usual in any of the outcomes. Further studies with a longer follow-up period, better assessments of recovery and a systematic review of the existing trials are needed to assess if the program is effective.",

keywords = "Journal Article",

author = "Dalum, {Helle Stentoft} and Waldemar, {Anna Kristine} and Lisa Korsbek and Carsten Hjorth{\o}j and Mikkelsen, {John Hagel} and Karin Thomsen and Kristen Kistrup and Mette Olander and Jane Lindschou and Merete Nordentoft and {Falgaard Eplov}, Lene",

year = "2018",

month = jan,

day = "2",

doi = "10.1080/09638237.2016.1244716",

language = "English",

volume = "27",

pages = "30--37",

journal = "Aging & Mental Health",

issn = "1360-7863",

publisher = "Routledge",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Participants' and staffs' evaluation of the Illness Management and Recovery program

T2 - a randomized clinical trial

AU - Dalum, Helle Stentoft

AU - Waldemar, Anna Kristine

AU - Korsbek, Lisa

AU - Hjorthøj, Carsten

AU - Mikkelsen, John Hagel

AU - Thomsen, Karin

AU - Kistrup, Kristen

AU - Olander, Mette

AU - Lindschou, Jane

AU - Nordentoft, Merete

AU - Falgaard Eplov, Lene

PY - 2018/1/2

Y1 - 2018/1/2

N2 - BACKGROUND: Psychoeducational interventions for people with severe mental illness are developed to enable them to manage their illness effectively to improve prognosis and recovery.AIM: The aim was to investigate the benefits and harms of the Illness Management and Recovery (IMR) program among people with severe mental illness in Denmark. IMR builds among other approaches on a psychoeducational approach.METHODS: A randomized, multi-center, clinical trial of the IMR program compared with treatment as usual among 198 participants with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder investigating outcomes related to illness self-management assessed by the IMR scale, recovery, hope and participants' satisfaction at the end of the 9 months intervention period.RESULTS: No statistical differences were seen between the two groups regarding illness self-management, hope, recovery, or satisfaction with treatment.CONCLUSIONS: IMR appears not to be better than treatment as usual in any of the outcomes. Further studies with a longer follow-up period, better assessments of recovery and a systematic review of the existing trials are needed to assess if the program is effective.

AB - BACKGROUND: Psychoeducational interventions for people with severe mental illness are developed to enable them to manage their illness effectively to improve prognosis and recovery.AIM: The aim was to investigate the benefits and harms of the Illness Management and Recovery (IMR) program among people with severe mental illness in Denmark. IMR builds among other approaches on a psychoeducational approach.METHODS: A randomized, multi-center, clinical trial of the IMR program compared with treatment as usual among 198 participants with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder investigating outcomes related to illness self-management assessed by the IMR scale, recovery, hope and participants' satisfaction at the end of the 9 months intervention period.RESULTS: No statistical differences were seen between the two groups regarding illness self-management, hope, recovery, or satisfaction with treatment.CONCLUSIONS: IMR appears not to be better than treatment as usual in any of the outcomes. Further studies with a longer follow-up period, better assessments of recovery and a systematic review of the existing trials are needed to assess if the program is effective.

KW - Journal Article

U2 - 10.1080/09638237.2016.1244716

DO - 10.1080/09638237.2016.1244716

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 27841057

SN - 1360-7863

VL - 27

SP - 30

EP - 37

JO - Aging & Mental Health

JF - Aging & Mental Health

IS - 1

ER -

Participants' and staffs' evaluation of the Illness Management and Recovery program: a randomized clinical trial

Abstract

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this