Empirische evidence voor de effectiviteit van routine outcome monitoring

een literatuuronderzoek

Translated title of the contribution: Empirical evidence for the effectiveness of routine outcome monitoring: a study of the literature

I. V. E. Carlier, D. Meuldijk, I. M. Van Vliet, E. M. Van Fenema, N. J. A. Van Der Wee, F. G. Zitman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Routine Outcome Monitoring (ROM) is an important instrument for measuring the effectiveness of treatment and has been implemented in the Dutch mental health care system. Aim: To review the effectiveness of ROM with regard to diagnosis, treatment, and other outcomes. Method: The literature study focused on randomised controlled trials (RCT'S) of ROM performed on patients of all age groups, some being general patients, others being psychiatric patients. The main search words were 'routine outcome monitoring' or 'routine outcome measurement'. Results: 52 RCTS on adult patients were included in the study; 45 of these trials were performed on patients with mental health problems, but not always in a psychiatric setting or as primary outcome measure, ROM appears to have positive effects on diagnosis and treatment and on the communication between patient and therapist. Other results were less clear. Conclusion: ROM seems to be particularly effective for the monitoring of treatments which have not been entirely successful. Further research needs to be done into the clinical and cost-effectiveness of ROM when used with adults and children who have mental health problems.

Original languageDutch
Pages (from-to)121-128
Number of pages8
JournalTijdschrift voor Psychiatrie
Volume54
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 27 Feb 2012
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Effectiveness
  • Measurement
  • Routine outcome monitoring

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Empirical evidence for the effectiveness of routine outcome monitoring: a study of the literature'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this