Background: This study investigated the relationship between patient-rated unmet needs and subjective quality of life using routine outcome data. Methods: 265 mental health service patients from South Verona were assessed using the Camberwell Assessment of Need, the Lancashire Quality of Life Profile, and other standardised assessments of symptoms, disability, function and service satisfaction. At 1-year follow-up, 166 patients were still in contact, of whom 121 patients (73%) were re-assessed. Results: Higher baseline quality of life was associated with being male, a diagnosis of psychosis, higher disability, higher satisfaction with care, fewer staff-rated or patient-rated unmet needs, and fewer patient-rated met needs (accounting for 40% of the variance). Specifically, fewer baseline patient-rated unmet needs were cross-sectionally associated with a higher quality of life (B = –0.08, 95% CI –0.12 to –0.04). Apart from its baseline value, the only baseline predictor of follow-up QoL was patient-rated unmet need (B = –0.08, 95% CI –0.21 to –0.09), accounting for 58% of the variance in follow-up quality of life. Graphical chain modelling confirmed this association. Conclusions: The association between high numbers of unmet needs and low subjective quality of life appears increasingly robust across several studies. Future research will need to investigate whether changes in needs precede changes in quality of life. This study provides further evidence that a policy of actively assessing and addressing patient-rated unmet needs may lead to improved quality of life.

Keywords:
Mental health, Quality of life, Outcome assessment (health care)
1.
Phelan M, Slade M, Thornicroft G, Dunn G, Holloway F, Wykes T, Strathdee G, Loftus L, McCrone P, Hayward P: The Camberwell Assessment of Need: The validity and reliability of an instrument to assess the needs of people with severe mental illness. Br J Psychiatry 1995;167:589–595.
2.
Department of Health: National Service Framework for Mental Health. London, HMSO, 1999.
3.
Lasalvia A, Ruggeri M, Mazzi MA, Dall’Agnola RB: The perception of needs for care in staff and patients in community-based mental health services. The South Verona Outcome Project 3. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2000;102:366–375.
4.
UK700 Group: Predictors of quality of life in people with severe mental illness. Study methodology with baseline analysis in the UK700 trial. Br J Psychiatry 1999;175:426–432.
5.
Slade M, Leese M, Taylor R, Thornicroft G: The association between needs and quality of life in an epidemiologically representative sample of people with psychosis. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1999;100:149–157.
6.
Bollen K: Structural Equations with Latent Variables. New York, Wiley, 1998.
7.
Ruggeri M, Gater R, Bisoffi G, Barbui C, Tansella M: Determinants of subjective quality of life in patients attending community-based mental health services. The South-Verona Outcome Project 5. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2002;105:131–140.
8.
Ruggeri M, Biggeri A, Rucci P, Tansella M: Multivariate analysis of outcome of mental health care using graphical chain models. The South-Verona Outcome Project 1. Psychol Med 1998;28:1421–1431.
9.
Ruggeri M, Bisoffi G, Fontecedro L, Warner R: Subjective and objective dimensions of quality of life in psychiatric patients: A factor analytical approach: The South Verona Outcome Project 4. Br J Psychiatry 2001;178:268–275.
10.
Endicott J, Spitzer RL: The Global Assessment Scale: A procedure for measuring overall severity of psychiatric disturbance. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1976:33;766–771.
11.
Ventura J, Green MF, Shaner A, Liberman RP: Training and quality assurance with the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale: ‘The drift busters’. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res 1993;3:221–244.
12.
World Health Organization: Disability Assessment Schedule (DAS-II). Geneva, World Health Organization, 1998.
13.
Ruggeri M, Dall’Agnola R: The development and use of the Verona Expectations for Care Scale (VECS) and the Verona Service Satisfaction Scale (VSSS) for measuring expectations and satisfaction with community-based psychiatric services in patients, relatives and professionals. Psychol Med 1993;23:511–523.
14.
Oliver JP: The social care directive: development of a quality of life profile for use in community services for the mentally ill. Soc Work Soc Sci Rev 1991;3:4–45.
15.
Edwards D: Introduction to Graphical Modelling, ed 2. New York, Springer, 2000.
16.
McKenzie N, Marks I: Routine monitoring of outcome over 11 years in a residential behavioural psychotherapy unit. Psychother Psychosom 2003;72:223–227.
17.
Priebe S, McCabe R, Bullenkamp J, Hansson L, Rossler W, Torres-Gonzales F, Wiersma D: The impact of routine outcome measurement on treatment processes in community mental health care: Approach and methods of the MECCA study. Epidemiol Psychiatr Soc 2002;11:198–205.
18.
Slade M: Routine outcome assessment in mental health services. Psychol Med 2002;32:1339–1344.
19.
Björkman T, Hansson L: Predictors of improvement in quality of life of long-term mentally ill individuals receiving case management. Eur Psychiatry 2002;17:33–40.
20.
Slade M, Phelan M, Thornicroft G, Parkman S: The Camberwell Assessment of Need (CAN): Comparison of assessments by staff and patients of the needs of the severely mentally ill. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 1996;31:109–113.
21.
Slade M, Phelan M, Thornicroft G: A comparison of needs assessed by staff and an epidemiologically representative sample of patients with psychosis. Psychol Med 1998;28:543–550.
22.
Wiersma D, Nienhuis FJ, Giel R, Slooff C: Stability and change in needs of patients with schizophrenic disorders: A 15- and 17-year follow-up from first onset of psychosis, and a comparison between ‘objective’ and ‘subjective’ assessments of needs for care. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 1998;33:49–56.
23.
Hansson L, Vinding HR, Mackeprang T, Sourander A, Werdelin G, Bengtsson-Tops A, Bjarnason O, Dybbro J, Nilsson L, Sandlund M, Sorgaard K, Middelboe T: Comparison of key worker and patient assessment of needs in schizophrenic patients living in the community: A Nordic multicentre study. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2001;103:45–51.
24.
Beck CA, Joseph L, Belisle P, Pilote L: Predictors of quality of life 6 months and 1 year after acute myocardial infarction. Am Heart J 2002;142:271–279.
25.
Lasalvia A, Ruggeri M, Santolini N: Subjective quality of life: Its relationship with clinician-rated and patient-rated psychopathology. Psychother Psychosom 2002;71:275–284.
26.
Grahn B, Ekdahl C, Borgquist L: Motivation as a predictor of changes in quality of life and working ability in multidisciplinary rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil 2002;22:639–654.
27.
Michalos AC, Zumbo BD: Ethnicity, modern prejudice and the quality of life. Soc Indicators Res 2001;53:189–222.
28.
Schyns P: Crossnational differences in happiness: Economic and cultural factors explored. Soc Indicators Res 1998;43:3–26.
© 2004 S. Karger AG, Basel
2004
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.