The effects of motivation feedback in patients with severe mental illness: a cluster randomized controlled trial
Authors Jochems EC, van der Feltz-Cornelis C, van Dam A, Duivenvoorden H, Mulder C
Received 26 August 2015
Accepted for publication 27 October 2015
Published 11 December 2015 Volume 2015:11 Pages 3049—3064
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single anonymous peer review
Peer reviewer comments 2
Editor who approved publication: Dr Roger Pinder
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 disorders
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]