Diminished insight may limit the usefulness of the self-report methodology for assessing quality of life for some individuals with schizophrenia.

No abstract

Using a naturalistic design involving consecutive referrals self–selected for family–oriented treatment, forty–two participants from a residential programme and twenty–five participants from a community–based programme were assessed on a range of alcohol–use and psychosocial measures before treatment. A proportion of these cases were assessed after treatment and at six months’follow–up. At six months’ follow–up 79 per cent of both the residential and community groups were either abstinent or drinking moderately. However, more members of the residential group (75 per cent) were abstinent at follow–up compared with the community group (36 per cent). In contrast, more members of the community group were moderate drinkers (43 per cent) at follow–up compared with the residential group (4 per cent). At six months’ follow–up, compared with the community group, more members of the residential group showed a clinically significant reduction in recent negative consequences of drinking and psychological adjustment problems. Both groups made significant mean gains on indices of alcohol abuse and psychosocial adjustment but there were important intergroup differences. The residential group showed a greater mean reduction in recent negative consequences from drinking but the community group showed a greater mean reduction in the percentage of days’ heavy drinking.

Objectives: To evaluate the self-rated or subjective quality of life of individuals with schizophrenia in residential care settings.Method: Forty individuals who fulfilled DSM-IV criteria for schizophrenia were interviewed using the Lancashire Quality of Life Profile.Results: Fifty-two per cent of the sample reported their global subjective quality of life to be satisfactory. Global subjective quality of life was rated lower than the majority of life domains evaluated. The areas of least satisfaction included finances and work. However, the majority of patients were satisfied with their living situation, safety, health, religion, leisure, social and family relations. There was some evidence of a quality of life gradient across these residential settings.Conclusions: Although these patients were satisfied with the majority of life domains assessed, these data need to be interpreted cautiously given the limitations of the study design and the method used to evaluate quality of life.