| 1. |
- Korkeila, J, et al.
(författare)
-
Structure of needs among persons with schizophrenia
- 2005
-
Ingår i: Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0933-7954 .- 1433-9285. ; 40:3, s. 233-239
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background The importance of needs assessment for service development has been widely recognised. Several studies have focused on the associations between ratings of needs by patients and staff and have found clear differences, especially concerning the unmet needs. Methods The present study is part of a Nordic Multicentre study that investigates the life and care of outpatients with a schizophrenia group illness in all the Nordic countries. The aim of this paper is to study the patterns of needs as identified by patients and staff according to the Camberwell Assessment of Needs (CAN). Quality of life, level of functioning, and psychiatric symptoms were assessed. Results The sample includes 300 patients, 194 (65%) men and 106 (35%) women. The factor analysis identified five factors for patients and four factors for staff in the questionnaire on ratings of needs. In four of the five patient-related factors a meaningful interpretation was possible, and the factors were named skills, illness, coping, and substance abuse. The staff-related factors were named skills, impairment, symptom, and substance abuse. There were significant associations between the sum scores constructed from the factors and measures of functioning level and symptoms. Conclusions It seems that the sum factor reflecting secondary needs was the most important of the identified factors among both patient and staff ratings. The item-by-item comparisons in previous studies have emphasised differences between patient and staff ratings, but our analysis of the structure of needs also found similarities in the structures and in the associations between the identified sum scores and measures of symptoms, functioning level, and quality of life.
|
|
| 2. |
- Bengtsson-Tops, A, et al.
(författare)
-
Subjective versus interviewer assessment of global quality of life among persons with schizophrenia living in the community: A Nordic multicentre study
- 2005
-
Ingår i: Quality of Life Research. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1573-2649 .- 0962-9343. ; 14:1, s. 221-229
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Few studies have investigated differences between subjective and externally assessed quality of life in individuals with a severe mental illness. In a sample of 387 patients with schizophrenia living in the community the present study investigated the association between subjective and interviewer-rated quality of life, clinical and sociodemographic factors related to the two assessments, and if discrepancies in the assessments were related to any clinical or social features of the patients. Method: The study was a Nordic multicentre study with a cross-sectional design. Instruments used were the Lancashire Quality of Life Profile, the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, the Interview Schedule for Social Interaction, Camberwell Assessment of Needs and General Assessment of Functioning. Results: The correlation between subjective and interviewer-rated quality of life was moderate (ICC=0.33). More severe affective symptoms, fewer emotional relations and a lower monthly income were related to poorer subjectively rated quality of life but in a stepwise multiple regression analysis accounted for only 14.1 of the variance. Poorer interviewer-rated quality of life was mainly related to a more severe psychopathology but also to a lower monthly income, fewer emotional relations and not being employed. Together these factors accounted for 45.5 of the variance. A greater discrepancy between the subjective and the interviewer rating was found in patients with less affective symptoms, unemployment, and a better social network. Conclusion: Only a moderate correlation between subjective and interviewer-assessed global quality of life was found, implying that the sources of assessment differed, as was also shown in subsequent regression models. It is concluded that both perspectives on the patient's quality of life may be valuable for treatment planning, especially in cases where differences in quality of life assessment related to the patient's psychopathology may be expected.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
