Skip to main content

Table 1 Operationalization of FIT components

From: Evaluation of new flexible and integrative psychiatric treatment models in Germany- assessment and preliminary validation of specific program components

No.

Component

Operationalisation

Assessment

I

Shifting in- to outpatient setting

Shift of treatment from I 1 towards D 2 and/or O 3

• Number of outpatient SoF4/total number SoF4 during EP5

 

II

Flexible care management across settings

Unproblematic shift of SoF 4 (prompt, little bureaucracy

• Number of CoT6 using all three SoF4 during EP5/ total number CoT6

• Treatment D2, I1, and/or O3 in the same unit (ward, level etc.)

• Systematic steering of treatment beyond all SoFs4

• Application of SoF4 spanning roster and therapy plans

Rating scale (0–2)

• Number SoF4-spanning sessions (meetings etc.)

Rating scale (1–3)

III

Continuity of treatment team

Implementation of team- and individual-related continuity

• Percentage of staff working in more than one SoF4 (on a regular basis)

• Coordinated admission (coordinating staff member)

• Coordination of treatment by e.g. case manager, SoF4-spanning care

• Home treatment by I1- and D2- teams

• Outsourced PIA (outpatient department) team (not working in I1 or D2)

Rating scale (0–2)

IV

Multiprofessional Cooperation

Intense multiprofessional cooperation

• Absolute number of mandatory sessions across all occupational groups

Absolute number

• Measure/action to optimize cooperation across all occupational groups

Rating scale (0–1)

• Training sessions multiprofessional cooperation

• Number occupational groups working in home treatment (on a regular basis)

Rating scale (0–2)

V

Therapeutic group sessions across all settings

Therapeutic groups with members from all SoF 4

• Number of group sessions open for all SoFs4

Rating scale (0–2)

VI

Outreach home care

Multiprofessional treatment at home ≥ 1 week

• Number CoT6 with home-treatment/ all I1-cases during EP5

 

• Cars for home-visits

Rating scale (0–2)

VII

Involvement of informal caregivers

Informal caregivers as therapeutic tool

• “Network” or other forms of systemic dialog with informal caregivers and/or “carer-conference” and/or “caregiver groups”

Rating scale (0–1)

• Number of groups open for informal caregivers

Rating scale (0–1)

• Percentage of systemic training for staff/employees (e.g. open dialogue)

Percentage

VIII

Accessibility of services

Geographical accessibility and accessibility of teams

• Accessibility of services within one-hour drive

• 24-h-accessibility of multiprofessional mental health team (not doctor on call or the like)

• Shuttle service for services users

Rating scale (0–2)

• Waiting list

Reverse rating scale (1–0)

IX

Sovereign steering of services

Freedom of therapeutic decisions

• Number of exeats ≥2 nights in a row/all exeats during EP

• Number of exeats per service user/ calendar week during EP

• Daypatient treatment as well during the night

• Rules according to contract in all matters concerning setting of treatment and length of treatment

Rating scale (0–2)

X

Cooperation across Sectors

Cooperation with ambulant care systems

• Mutual scheduling and realizing of treatment with ambulant care systems (SGB V)

• Mutual scheduling and realizing of treatment with social welfare system (SGB XII)

Rating scale (0–2)

• “Community psychiatric network”

Rating scale (0–1)

XI

Expansion of professional expertise

Professionalisation of staff

• Multiprofessional training of staff concerning FIT models

• Measures to multiply knowledge about FIT models

• FIT models as part of appraisal interviews

Rating scale (0–1)

• Percentage of nurses/caregivers moderating group sessions

Percentage

  1. NOTE: 1I inpatient, 2D day-patient, 3O outpatient, 4SoF setting of treatment (outpatient, day-patient, inpatient), 5EP evaluation period, 6CoT case of treatment