CPG for Psychosocial Interventions in Severe Mental ... - GuíaSalud

Summary of evidence
1-
1-
1-
1-
The evidence is insufficient to determine if pre-vocational training confers an additional
benefit to the labour expectations of people with SMI when we compare it with standard
treatment, with respect to maintenance of competitive employment 168,170,171,173,174 .
PVT favours obtaining some type of employment when compared with standard hospital
treatment 168 .
There are no differences with respect to hours worked per month between PVT and hospital
ST, for people with SMI 171 .
The incorporation of payment into PVT produces a limited but significant improvement
of the results 172 . The incorporation of payment into PVT produces a limited but significant
improvement of the results 172 .
1+
There is no difference with respect to participation level of users in programmes when
PVT programmes are compared with standard hospital treatment 165 .
1+ Neither PVT nor community ST improve the programme finalisation rates 165 .
1+ PVT does not improve the hospital readmission ratios 165 .
1-
1-
1+
1+
1+
1+
1+
1+
1+
3
There are no differences between PVT (clubhouse model) vs. ST in relation to achieving
competitive employment 170 .
There are less hospital readmissions in the group that participated in PVT-clubhouse than
in the group that received standard treatment 170 .
The participants in the paid sheltered work group presented greater permanence, lower
number of hospital readmissions and lower scores in symptoms than those who only received
PVT 176 .
Those who received PVT + additional psychological intervention presented differences
in favour of obtaining “some form of employment” and “some form of employment or
education at the end of the study” 178 .
There are no differences between PVT + psychological techniques vs. control group with
respect to clinical improvement 178 .
Patients with prior labour failure integrated in the sheltered employment programme with
cognitive training presented greater probability of having worked, having maintained
more jobs, worked more weeks, more hours and higher salaries than patients who were
only offered sheltered employment 188 .
Users with transitional employment and accelerated entry did not achieve better employment
data than users with transitional employment and gradual entry, but they did earn
more money 179 .
The sheltered employment group showed a significantly larger number of people in competitive
employment after 24 and 36 months, as well as greater probability than the ST
group of being in some type of employment and of earning more money 180 .
Sheltered employment did not show significant differences with respect to the control
group in participation ratios or in number of readmissions 180 .
The greater access and participation in labour rehabilitation services was associated with
a greater probability of achieving competitive employment, and to a greater extent, noncompetitive
employment 189 .
88 CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES IN THE SPANISH NHS