This study compared the costs and outcomes associated with three treatment programs that served 149 individuals with dual disorders (i.e., individuals with co-occurring severe mental illness and substance use disorders) who were homeless at baseline. The three treatment programs were: Integrated Assertive Community Treatment (IACT), Assertive Community Treatment only (ACTO), and standard care (Control). Participants were randomly assigned to treatment and followed for a period of 24 months. Clients in the IACT and ACTO programs were more satisfied with their treatment program and reported more days in stable housing than clients in the Control condition. There were no significant differences between treatment groups on psychiatric symptoms and substance use. The average total costs associated with the IACT and Control conditions were significantly less than the average total costs for the ACTO condition.

Elsewhere the authors have shown that ACT and IT had advantages for health and stability of accommodation but these analyses suggest that more specialized interventions are needed to reduce criminal behaviour in dual disorder individuals.

This study compared the effectiveness of the behavioral model to predict two service utilization variables: case manager visits and total services used. Nearly 4000 individuals who were homeless and suffered from severe mental illness provided data for the study. Enabling variables explained more variance of both service utilization variables than predisposing or need variables. Social support from professionals was the strongest predictor for both service utilization variables.

No abstract

Past research has found that a positive working alliance between clients and their case managers is modestly correlated with client outcomes. The current study tried to identify the predictors of the working alliance in a sample of 115 clients who were receiving services from Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) teams. All of the clients suffered from severe mental illness, had a substance use disorder and were homeless at baseline. Both the client's rating and the case manager's rating of the working alliance were assessed at 3 months and 15 months post baseline. Client characteristics, particularly motivation to change, explained more of the variance of the client's rating of the alliance than treatment variables or client change on the outcome variables. On the other hand, treatment variables (e.g., the amount of transportation services provided) and client change on the outcome variables explained more of the variance of the case manager's rating of the alliance.