COMPARING INTEGRATED AND FUNCTIONAL SYSTEMS OF MENTAL HEALTH CARE
Research type
Research Study
Full title
COMPARING POLICY FRAMEWORK, STRUCTURE, EFFECTIVENESS AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF FUNCTIONAL AND INTEGRATED SYSTEMS OF MENTAL HEALTH CARE (acronym:COFI)
IRAS ID
151894
Contact name
Stefan Priebe
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
Queen Mary University of London
Research summary
Mental disorders cause high levels of disability and burden, as well as significant health-care costs. There is a need to maximise the effect of mental health care through an optimal service organization. Two systems of mental health care can be identified: 1) integrated systems: care is provided by staff led by the same consultant across inpatient and outpatient services; 2) functional systems: care is provided by staff led by different consultants in distinct services.
The overall aim of COFI is to compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the functional and integrated systems of mental health care. The comparison will consider clinical and social outcomes as well as costs, quality and safety of care within the two systems and patient reported outcomes. Different patients subgroups defined by diagnosis, age, gender, socio-economic and migrant status, and physical comorbidities will be investigated.
COFI will be conducted in 7 mental health Trusts in the United Kingdom (UK), in the areas of North Essex, Cornwall, Dudley, South Staffordshire, East London, North East London and North London. These areas are representative of different geographic contexts, are located in urban/rural areas and have a wide range of different caseloads. In UK a minimum of 3022 patients will be recruited. This will enable us to capture a difference as small as 5% in the rates of re-hospitalisations between the two systems, as even such small difference may have important implications on costs of mental health care. The study will be part of a multicentre European study carried out in five countries (Belgium, Germany, Italy, Poland, UK) of which the Queen Mary University of London is the coordinator centre. The sample size calculation for the UK study has been performed in such a way to provide nationally representative findings.
REC name
North East - Newcastle & North Tyneside 2 Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
14/NE/1017
Date of REC Opinion
9 Jun 2014
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion