Skip to main content

Table 3 Multivariate associations between CTO experience and continuity of care variables, controlling for age, gender, ethnicity and symptom severity

From: Associations between compulsory community treatment and continuity of care in a three year follow-up of the Oxford Community Treatment Order Trial (OCTET) cohort

Measure

Randomised to CTO

Subject to CTO

Number of days on CTO

Proportion of outpatient days on CTO

 

Beta/OR/IRR/RR and 95% CI

p-value

Beta/OR/IRR/RR and 95% CI

p-value

Beta/OR/IRR/RR and 95% CI

p-value

Beta/OR/IRR/RR and 95% CI

p-value

Average gap between face-to-face contactsa

1.402 (−4.981, 2.176)

0.441

−5.090 (−8.71, −1.47)

0.006

−0.006 (−0.011, −0.001)

0.020

−6.954 (−11.839, −2.069)

0.022

Number of 60 day gaps without contactb

0.919 (0.660, 1.280)

0.617

0.615 (0.440, 0.859)

0.004

0.999 (0.999, 1.000)

0.003

0.423 (0.257, 0.696)

0.001

Number of different mental health professions seen, per patient b

1.002 (0.781, 1.281)

0.988

1.075 (0.836, 1.383)

0.574

1.000 (1, 1)

0.596

1.088 (0.773, 1.531)

0.630

Number of care coordinators, per patient b

1.069 (0.813, 1.404)

0.634

1.113 (0.840, 1.474)

0.456

1.000 (1, 1)

0.992

1.076 (0.738, 1.570)

0.702

Number of psychiatrists, per patient b

1.007 (0.780, 1.301)

0.956

1.203 (0.923, 1.567)

0.171

1.000 (1, 1)

0.844

1.203 (0.842, 1.720)

0.310

Discharged from index admission to support accommodation, yes c

0.930 (0.533, 1.621)

0.797

1.361 (0.759, 2.439)

0.301

1.000 (1.000, 1.001)

0.920

1.740 (0.831, 3.644)

0.142

Any referral documented, yes c

1.063 (0.661, 1.707)

0.802

1.242 (0.764, 2.019)

0.383

1.000 (0.999, 1.001)

0.910

1.123 (0.580, 2.174)

0.730

Proportion of documents copied to user (0%)d

1–50%

1.809 (1.017, 3.218)

0.044

1.215 (0.690, 2.140)

0.500

1.000 (0.999, 1.001)

0.971

1.036 (0.359, 2.988)

0.948

51–100%

2.768 (1.490, 5.140)

<0.001

1.352 (0.732, 2.496)

0.355

1.000 (0.999, 1.001)

0.592

1.232 (0.412, 3.688)

0.709

  1. Items in bold are significant at the level shown in the table
  2. aOutcome analysed using linear regression
  3. bOutcome analysed using negative binomial regression
  4. cOutcome analysed using logistic regression
  5. dOutcome analysed using log multinomial regression