Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T08:22:00.739Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Illness Management and Recovery Program: an international effectiveness study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 June 2014

R Clancy ,
D Clancy ,
K Mueser ,
V Carr ,
T Lewin ,
M Hazelton  and
K Sly
R Clancy
Affiliation:
Centre for Mental Health Studies, Newcastle
D Clancy
Affiliation:
Centre for Mental Health Studies, Newcastle Newcastle Mental Health Service
K Mueser
Affiliation:
New Hampshire-Dartmouth Psychiatric Research Centre, USA
V Carr
Affiliation:
Centre for Mental Health Studies, Newcastle
T Lewin
Affiliation:
Centre for Mental Health Studies, Newcastle Hunter New England Mental Health
M Hazelton
Affiliation:
University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia
K Sly
Affiliation:
Centre for Mental Health Studies, Newcastle
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Type
Abstracts from ‘Brainwaves’— The Australasian Society for Psychiatric Research Annual Meeting 2006, 6–8 December, Sydney, Australia
Information
Acta Neuropsychiatrica , Volume 18 , Issue 6 , December 2006 , pp. 246 - 247
Copyright
Copyright © 2006 Blackwell Munksgaard

Background:

Much research has been conducted to establish best practice in psychosocial interventions for mental illness. The challenge of ensuring that best practice is delivered to consumers has historically been left to program managers. This research contributes to the science of technology transfer: assessing the trans-ferability, uptake and effectiveness of a comprehensive psychological intervention within routine mental health services.

The Illness Management and Recovery Program (IMR) was developed as one of six evidence-based practices in the (US) National Evidence-based Practices Project. The paper reports on the implementation of the IMR in Newcastle, Australia, and outcomes from both Australian and US sites.

Methods:

This study comprised a multicenter, international effectiveness study of a comprehensive, evidence-based psychosocial intervention for serious mental illness. The study centers included public mental health facilities in Newcastle and North Carolina. Rigorous fidelity and outcome measures were conducted at baseline, postintervention (9 months) and at follow-up (12 months).

Results:

Retention in this comprehensive program was satisfactory (76%). Statistically significant improvements were noted on a range of measures including the BSI, GAF, Coping Skills subscales, Knowledge of Illness, and the Recovery Assessment Scale.

Conclusions:

The pilot data support the feasibility of implementing the IMR program in routine mental health settings. The findings suggest that participation in the program is associated with benefits in illness management, progress toward recovery and improved functioning. Individuals completing the IMR program reported significant improvements in hope, coping self-efficacy and distress-related to symptoms.