Flexible and integrative treatment (FIT) services in Germany make it possible to shift mental health inpatient care to day- and outpatient care. This paper presents the results of the mixed methods, participatory process evaluation (= PE) of the PsychCare clinical trial, which compares the outcomes of nine FIT departments to those of eight standard mental health care services. This PE integrates diverse data using a program theory and data transformation approach. It shows various implementation types of FIT services and how their processes and structures are distinct from those of control conditions, also experienced by service users. It contributes to mixed methods research by showing that the PE methodological frame is a valuable tool to effectively involve service users and other stakeholders.
AaronsG. A.WellsR.ZagurskyK.FettesD. L.PalinkasL. A. (2009). Implementing evidence-based practice in community mental health agencies: Multiple stakeholder perspectives. American Journal of Public Health, 99(11), 2087–2095. https://doi.org/10.2105%2FAJPH.2009.161711
2.
ÅkerbladL.Seppänen-JärveläR.HaapakoskiK. (2021). Integrative strategies in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 15(2), 152–170. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689820957125
3.
AssheuerM.BeineK.MehlC.KellnerM.AgelinkM.SiebererM.de CruppéW.GeraedtsM. (2021). Umsetzung von Behandlungskontinuität im Versorgungsalltag – ein Vergleich zwischen zwei psychiatrischen Kliniken 1. Psychiatrische Praxis, 48(3), 143–148. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1274-3792
4.
BatleyP. N. (2021). Bayesian analyses with qualitative data. In OnwuegbuzieA. J.JohnsonR. B. (Eds.), The Routledge reviewer’s guide to mixed methods analysis (pp. 109–116). Routledge.
5.
BaumF.SchofferO.NeumannA.SeifertM.KliemtR.MarchS.SwartE.HäckelD.PfennigA.SchmittJ. (2020). Effectiveness of global treatment budgets for patients with mental disorders—Claims data based meta-analysis of 13 controlled studies from Germany. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 11(131), 131. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00131
BeekerT.GlückR. K.ZiegenhagenJ.GöppertL.JänchenP.KrispinH.SchwarzJ.von PeterS. (2021). Designed to clash? Reflecting on the practical, personal, and structural challenges of collaborative research in psychiatry. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12, 701312. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.701312
8.
BeresfordP.RussoJ. (2022). The Routledge international handbook of mad studies. Routledge.
9.
BerghöferA.HubmannS.BirkerT.HejnalT.FischerF. (2016). Evaluation of quality indicators of integrated care in a Regional Psychiatry Budget - A pre-post comparison by secondary data analysis. International Journal of Integrated Care, 16(4), 17. https://doi.org/10.5334/ijic.2479
10.
BishoppD.HareR. D. (2008). A multidimensional scaling analysis of the Hare PCL-R: Unfolding the structure of psychopathy. Psychology, Crime and Law: PC & L, 14(2), 117–132. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683160701483484
BorgI.GroenenP. J.MairP. (2018). Applied multidimensional scaling and unfolding. Springer International Publishing.
13.
BriegerP. (2019). The German community mental health system-a review. Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz, 62(2), 121–127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00103-018-2861-5
BudnickA.KuhnertR.SchmidtH.WienprechtL.KuhlmeyA.BlüherS. (2021). Sekundärdatenanalyse initial vollstationär behandelter Patienten mit Schizophrenie in einem Berliner Modellprojekt (nach § 64b SGB V). Das Gesundheitswesen, 83(11), 936–945. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1305-9991
16.
BühnerM. (2011). Einführung in die Test- und Fragebogenkonstruktion. Pearson Deutschland GmbH.
17.
BurnsT.CattyJ.DashM.RobertsC.LockwoodA.MarshallM. (2007). Use of intensive case management to reduce time in hospital in people with severe mental illness: Systematic review and meta-regression. British Medical Journal, 335(7615), 336. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39251.599259.55
18.
CampbellM. (2000). Framework for design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve health. British Medical Journal, 321(7262), 694–696. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.321.7262.694
19.
CanterD. (2012). Facet theory: Approaches to social research. Springer Science and Business Media.
20.
CaracelliV. J.GreeneJ. C. (1993). Data analysis strategies for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15(2), 195–207. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737015002195
21.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge.
22.
CollinsK. M. T. (2021). Chi-square automatic interaction detection analysis of qualitative data. In The Routledge reviewer’s guide to mixed methods analysis (pp. 69–76). Routledge.
23.
CoxK.LambertR.HitchcockJ. H. (2021). Multiple linear regression analysis with qualitative data that have been quantitized. In The Routledge reviewer’s guide to mixed methods analysis (pp. 77–88). Routledge.
24.
CraigP.DieppeP.MacintyreS.MichieS.NazarethI.PetticrewM.Medical Research Council Guidance. (2008). Developing and evaluating complex interventions: The new Medical Research Council guidance. British Medical Journal, 337, a1655. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.a1655
25.
CreswellJ. W.Plano ClarkV. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage Publications, Inc.
26.
DeisterA.ZeichnerD.WittT.ForsterH.-J. (2010). Veränderung der psychiatrischen Versorgung durch ein Regionales Budget. Psychiatrische Praxis, 37(7), 335–342. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0030-1248438
27.
DieterichM.IrvingC. B.ParkB.MarshallM.MarshallM. (2017). Intensive case management for severe mental illness. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 1(1), Article CD007906. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007906.pub3
28.
FaulknerA. (2017). Survivor research and Mad studies: The role and value of experiential knowledge in mental health research. Disability and Society, 32(4), 500–520. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2017.1302320
29.
FettersM. D.Molina-AzorinJ. F. (2020). Utilizing a mixed methods approach for conducting interventional evaluations. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 14(2), 131–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689820912856
30.
FrenchC.PinnockH.ForbesG.SkeneI.TaylorS. J. C. (2020). Process evaluation within pragmatic randomised controlled trials: What is it, why is it done, and can we find it? A systematic review. Trials, 21(1), 916. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04762-9
31.
GillardS.BorschmannR.TurnerK.Goodrich-PurnellN.LovellK.ChambersM. (2010). “What difference does it make?” Finding evidence of the impact of mental health service user researchers on research into the experiences of detained psychiatric patients: Impact of mental health service user researchers on research. Health Expectations: An International Journal of Public Participation in Health Care and Health Policy, 13(2), 185–194. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1369-7625.2010.00596.x
32.
GrantA.BuggeC.WellsM. (2020). Designing process evaluations using case study to explore the context of complex interventions evaluated in trials. Trials, 21(1), 982. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04880-4
33.
GuestG.McLellanE. (2003). Distinguishing the trees from the Forest: Applying cluster analysis to thematic qualitative data. Field Methods, 15(2), 186–201. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822x03015002005
34.
HitchcockJ. H.LambertR.Scott HolcombT. (2021). Hierarchical linear modeling with qualitative data that have been quantitized. In The Routledge reviewer’s guide to mixed methods analysis (pp. 99–108). Routledge.
35.
IgnatyevY.MundtA. P.von PeterS.HeinzeM. (2019). Hospital length of stay among older people treated with flexibleand integrative psychiatric service models in Germany. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 34(11), 1557–1564. https://doi.org/10.1002/gps.5165
36.
IgnatyevY.TimmJ.HeinzeM.IndefreyS.von PeterS. (2017). Development and preliminary validation of the Scale for Evaluation of Psychiatric Integrative and Continuous Care (SEPICC) – patient’s version. Frontiers in Public Health, 8(18), 162. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2017.00162
37.
IndefreyS.BraunB.von PeterS.BechdolfA.BirkerT.DuveA.HardtO.HeiserP.HojeyK.RehrB.ScherkK.Schulz Du-BoisA.WilmsB.HeinzeM. (2020). Implementation of a global treatment budget in psychiatric departments in Germany – results and critical factors for success from staff perspective. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 11(610), 610. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00610
38.
JacksonT.PinnockH.LiewS. M.HorneE.EhrlichE.FultonO.WorthA.SheikhA.De SimoniA. (2020). Patient and public involvement in research: From tokenistic box ticking to valued team members. BMC Medicine, 18(1), 79. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-020-01544-7
39.
JonesN.ShattellM. (2016). Taking stock of the challenges and tensions involved in peer leadership in participatory research about psychosis and a call to do better. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 37(6), 440–442. https://doi.org/10.3109/01612840.2015.1124955
40.
KönigH.-H.HeinrichS.HeiderD.DeisterA.ZeichnerD.BirkerT.HierholzerC.AngermeyerM.RoickC. (2010). Das Regionale Psychiatriebudget (RPB): Ein Modell für das neue pauschalierende Entgeltsystem psychiatrischer Krankenhausleistungen?Psychiatrische Praxis, 37(1), 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0029-1223418
41.
KrämerU.RoseD. (2017). How users/survivors of psychiatry shape research processes: History and methods of user-led participatory research in English-speaking countries. Sozialpsychiatrische Inf, 47(2), 38–42. https://doi.org/10.5771/0171-4538-2017-2
42.
KruskalJ. B. (1964). Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goodness of fit to a nonmetric hypothesis. Psychometrika, 29(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02289565
43.
LambertN.CarrS. (2018). “Outside the original remit”: Co-production in UK mental health research, lessons from the field. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 27(4), 1273–1281. https://doi.org/10.1111/inm.12499
44.
LatimerE. A. (1999). Economic impacts of assertive community treatment: A review of the literature. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry Revue Canadienne de Psychiatrie, 44(5), 443–454. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674379904400504
45.
LinnanL. A.StecklerA. B. (2002). Process evaluation for public health interventions and research: An overview. In StecklerA.LinnanL. (Eds.), Process evaluation for public health interventions and research (pp. 1–23). Jossey-Bass.
46.
LüdeckeD.Ben-ShacharM.PatilI.WaggonerP.MakowskiD. (2021). Performance: An R package for assessment, comparison and testing of statistical models. Journal of Open Source Software, 6(60), 3139. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.03139
47.
MairP.BorgI.RuschT. (2016). Goodness-of-fit assessment in multidimensional scaling and unfolding. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 51(6), 772–789. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2016.1235966
48.
MairP.GroenenP. J. F.de LeeuwJ. (2022). More on multidimensional scaling and unfolding in R: smacof version 2. Journal of Statistical Software, 102(10), 1–47. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v102.i10
49.
Masterson-AlgarP.BurtonC. R.Rycroft-MaloneJ. (2018). The generation of consensus guidelines for carrying out process evaluations in rehabilitation research. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18(1), 180. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0647-y
50.
McGillE.MarksD.ErV.PenneyT.PetticrewM.EganM. (2020). Qualitative process evaluation from a complex systems perspective: A systematic review and framework for public health evaluators. PLoS Medicine, 17(11), e1003368. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003368
51.
McIverJ.CarminesE. (1981). Unidimensional scaling. Sage Publications, Inc.
52.
MeyG.MruckK. (2011). Grounded theory reader. Vs Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
53.
MeyG.MruckK. (2020). Handbuch qualitative forschung in der Psychologie. Springer Wiesbaden.
54.
MooreG. F.AudreyS.BarkerM.BondL.BonellC.HardemanW.MooreL.O’CathainA.TinatiT.WightD.BairdJ. (2015). Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. British Medical Journal, 350(mar19 6), h1258. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h1258
55.
Mueller-StierlinA. S.HelmbrechtM. J.HerderK.PrinzS.RosenfeldN.WalendzikJ.HolzmannM.DincU.SchützwohlM.BeckerT.KilianR. (2017). Does one size really fit all? The effectiveness of a non-diagnosis-specific integrated mental health care program in Germany in a prospective, parallel-group controlled multi-centre trial. BMC Psychiatry, 17(1), 283. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-017-1441-9
56.
NeumannA.HenseH.BaumF.KliemtR.SeifertM.HarstL.KubatD.MaicherB.SchreyC.SchmittJ.PfennigA.WeinholdI.SwartE.SoltmannB. (2021). Evaluation of a flexible and integrative psychiatric care model in a department of child and adolescent psychiatry in Tubingen, Germany: Study protocol (EVA_TIBAS). BMC Health Services Research, 21(1), 1262. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-07226-1
57.
NeumannA.SwartE.HäcklD.KliemtR.MarchS.KüsterD.ArnoldK.PetzoldT.BaumF.SeifertM.WeißJ.PfennigA.SchmittJ. (2018). The influence of cross-sectoral treatment models on patients with mental disorders in Germany: Study protocol of a nationwide long-term evaluation study (EVA64). BMC Psychiatry, 18(1), 139. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-018-1721-z
58.
NewmanD.ConstantinidesS. (2021). Structural equation modeling with qualitative data that have been quantitized. In The Routledge reviewer’s guide to mixed methods analysis (pp. 89–98). Routledge.
59.
OakleyA.StrangeV.BonellC.AllenE.StephensonJ.RIPPLE Study Team. (2006). Process evaluation in randomised controlled trials of complex interventions. British Medical Journal, 332(7538), 413–416. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.332.7538.413
PéladeauN. (2021). Cluster analysis for mixed methods research. In The Routledge reviewer’s guide to mixed methods analysis (pp. 57–68). Routledge.
63.
PetzoldT.NeumannA.SeifertM.KüsterD.PfennigA.WeißJ.HäckelD.SwartE.SchmittJ. (2016). Auswahl geeigneter Kontrollkliniken für die Durchführung der bundesweiten und einheitlichen Evaluation von Modellvorhaben nach § 64b SGB V. Analyse von Daten der Strukturierten Qualitätsberichte. Das Gesundheitswesen, 81(1), 63–71. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-116436
64.
RastierF. (2015). Interpretative semantics. In RiemerN. (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of semantics (1st ed., pp. 507–522). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315685533
65.
RoeD.SladeM.JonesN. (2022). The utility of patient-reported outcome measures in mental health. World Psychiatry, 21(1), 56–57. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20924
66.
RoickC.DeisterA.ZeichnerD.BirkerT.KönigH.-H.AngermeyerM. C. (2005). Das Regionale Psychiatriebudget: Ein neuer Ansatz zur effizienten Verknüpfung stationärer und ambulanter Versorgungsleistungen. Psychiatrische Praxis, 32(4), 177–184. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2004-834736
67.
RoseD.KalathilJ. (2019). Power, privilege and knowledge: The untenable promise of co-production in mental “health”. Frontiers in Sociology, 4(57), 57. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2019.00057
68.
RoseD.SweeneyA.LeeseM.ClementS.JonesI. R.BurnsT.CattyJ.WykesT. (2009). Developing a user-generated measure of continuity of care: Brief report. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 119(4), 320–324. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0447.2008.01296.x
69.
SaundersR. P.EvansM. H.JoshiP. (2005). Developing a process-evaluation plan for assessing health promotion program implementation: A how-to guide. Health Promotion Practice, 6(2), 134–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524839904273387
70.
SchaeferI.BärG.Mitglieder des Forschungsprojektes ElfE, Die. (2019). The analysis of qualitative data with peer researchers: An example from a participatory health research project. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung, 20(3), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.17169/FQS-20.3.3350
71.
SchwarzJ.CechnickiA.GodyńJ.GalbuseraL.BiechowskaD.Galińska-SkokB.von PeterS.IgnatyevY.MuehlensiepenF.SoltmannB.TimmJ.BalickiM.WciórkaJ.HeinzeM. (2022). Flexible and integrative psychiatric care based on a global treatment budget: Comparing the implementation in Germany and Poland. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 7(12), 760276. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.760276
72.
SchwarzJ.DuveA.HoffmannS.HeiserP.PérezG. R.HeinzeM.von PeterS. (2020b). Erfahrungen der Stakeholder mit den Modellvorhaben nach § 64b SGB V in der Kinder- und Jugendpsychiatrie und -psychotherapie – eine qualitative Studie. Zeitschrift für Kinder- und Jugendpsychiatrie und Psychotherapie, 48(5), 358–368. https://doi.org/10.1024/1422-4917/a000716
73.
SchwarzJ.IgnatyevY.BaumF.NeumannA.SoltmannB.PfennigA.TimmJ.HeinzeM.von PeterS. (2021b). Settingübergreifende Behandlung in der Psychiatrie: Umsetzung spezifischer Versorgungsmerkmale an Kliniken der Modell- und Regelversorgung (PsychCare-Studie). Nervenarzt, Der, 93(5), 476–482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00115-021-01238-2
74.
SchwarzJ.SchmidC.NeumannA.PfennigA.SoltmannB.HeinzeM.von PeterS. (2021a). Implementierung eines globalen Behandlungsbudgets in der Psychiatrie – Welche Anreize, Voraussetzungen und Herausforderungen gibt es? [Implementing a Global Treatment Budget for Psychiatric Hospital Services – What are Incentives, Requirements, and Challenges?]. Psychiatrische Praxis, 48(2), 193–200. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1421-3283
75.
SchwarzJ.StöckigtB.BerghöferA.von PeterS.BrücknerB. (2019a). Rechtskreisübergreifende Kooperation in einem Gemeindepsychiatrischen Zentrum: Eine qualitative Studie über die Erfahrungen der Stakeholder. Psychiatrische Praxis, 46(4), 200–205. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-0800-3783
76.
SchwarzJ.ZeipertM.IgnatyevY.IndefreyS.RehrB.TimmJ.HeinzeM.von PeterS. (2019b). Implementierungsstand und Erfahrungen der Stakeholder mit der Zuhause-Behandlung in psychiatrischen Modellvorhaben (nach §64b SGB V) – Eine Mixed-Methods Studie. Psychotherapie, Psychosomatik, Medizinische Psychologie, 70(2), 65–71. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-0942-2163
77.
SchwarzS.GalbuseraL.BechdolfA.BirkerT.DeisterA.DuveA.HeiserP.HojesK.IndefreyS.JohneJ.RehrB.RoutS.ScherkH.Schulz-Du BoisA.WilmsB.ZedlickD.ZeipertM.HeinzeM.von PeterS. (2020a). Changes in German Mental Health Care by implementing a Global Treatment Budget - A mixed-method process evaluation study. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 11(426), 1. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00426
78.
Service User Research Enterprise. (15 Juni 2023). Service User Research Enterprise. King’s College London. https://www.kcl.ac.uk/research/sure
79.
Shannon-BakerP. (2016). Making paradigms meaningful in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 10(4), 319–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689815575861
80.
SkivingtonK.MatthewsL.SimpsonS. A.CraigP.BairdJ.BlazebyJ. M.BoydK. A.CraigN.FrenchD. P.McIntoshE.PetticrewM.Rycroft-MaloneJ.WhiteM.MooreL. (2021). A new framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions: Update of Medical Research Council guidance. British Medical Journal, 374, n2061. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n2061
81.
SmithC. S.MorrisM.HillW.FrancovichC.McMullinJ.ChavezL.RhoadsC. (2004). Cultural consensus analysis as a tool for clinic improvements. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 19(5), 514–518. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30061.x
82.
SmithC. S.MorrisM.Langois-WinkleF.HillW.FrancovichC. (2010). A pilot study using Cultural Consensus Analysis to measure Systems-Based Practice performance. International Journal of Medical Education, 1, 15–18. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4bd5.6893
83.
SoltmannB.NeumannA.MarchS.WeinoldI.HäcklD.KliemtR.BaumF.RomanosM.SchwarzJ.von PeterS.IgnatyevY.ArnoldK.SwartE.HeinzeM.SchmittJ.PfennigA. (2021). Multiperspective and multimethod evaluation of flexible and integrative psychiatric care models in Germany: Study protocol of a prospective, controlled multicenter observational study (PsychCare). Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12, 659773. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.659773
84.
SpinelliS. (2018). Semiotics and sensory sciences: Meaning between texts and numbers. In Lecture notes in morphogenesis (pp. 75–100). Springer International Publishing.
85.
SteinL. I.TestM. (1980). Alternative to mental hospital treatment. I. Conceptual model, treatment program, and clinical evaluation. Archives of General Psychiatry, 37(4), 392–397. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.1980.01780170034003
86.
SuerdemA. (2021). Multidimensional scaling of qualitative data. In The Routledge reviewer’s guide to mixed methods analysis (pp. 45–56). Routledge.
87.
SwainK.WhitleyR.McHugoG. J.DrakeR. E. (2009). The sustainability of evidence-based practices in routine mental health agencies. Community Mental Health Journal.
88.
SweeneyA.MorganL. (2009). Levels and stages. In Handbook of service user involvement in mental health research (pp. 25–35). John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.
89.
ThornicroftG.TansellaM. (2004). Components of a modern mental health service: A pragmatic balance of community and hospital care. Overview of systematic evidence. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 185(4), 283–290. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.185.4.283
90.
Van HaneghanJ. (2021). Exploratory factor analysis of text. In The Routledge reviewer’s guide to mixed methods analysis (pp. 25–36). Routledge.
91.
von PeterS. (2017). Partizipative und kollaborative Forschungsansätze in der Psychiatrie. Psychiatrische Praxis, 44(8), 431–433. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-120241
92.
von PeterS.GlückR. K.GöppertL.ZiegenhagenJ.KrispinH.JänchenP.BeekerT. (2022a). Wie erleben Nutzer*innen die Versorgung? Vom Mehrwert partizipativ-kollaborativer Forschung. Psychiatrische Praxis, 49(1), 8–10. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1695-6019
93.
von PeterS.IgnatyevY.IndefreyS.JohneJ.SchwarzJ.TimmJ.HeinzeM. (2017). Spezifische Merkmale zur Einstufung der Modellversorgung nach §64b SGB V. Nervenarzt, Der, 89(5), 559–564. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00115-017-0459-z
94.
von PeterS.IgnatyevY.JohneJ.IndefreyS.Alp KankayaO.ReherB.ZeipertM.BechdolfA.BirkerT.DeisterA.DuveA.RoutS.ScherkH.Schulz-DuboisA.WilmsB.ZedlickD.GrollichP.BraunB.TimmJ.HeinzeM. (2019). Evaluation of flexible and integrative psychiatric treatment models in Germany—A mixed-method patient and staff-oriented exploratory study. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 9(785), 785. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00785
95.
von PeterS.JänchenP.GöppertL.BeekerT.ZiegenhagenJ.GlückR. K.KrispinH.PfennigA.HeinzeM.SchwarzJ.IgnatyevY. (2023). Erlebensbezogene Qualitätsmerkmale für die psychiatrische Behandlung: Vorstellung eines vorläufigen multivariaten Konstrukts [Experience-based items of quality in psychiatric treatment: A first multivariate construct]. Zeitschrift für Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualität im Gesundheitswesen, 176, 51–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.zefq.2022.12.002
96.
von PeterS.JohneJ.SchwarzJ.TimmJ.HeinzeM.IgnatyevY. (2018). Evaluation of new flexible and integrative psychiatric treatment models in Germany – assessment and preliminary validation of specific program components. BMC Psychiatry, 18(278), 278. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-018-1861-1
97.
von PeterS.KrispinH.GlückR. K.ZiegenhagenJ.GöppertL.JänchenP. (2022b). Needs and Experiences in Psychiatric Treatment (NEPT)- Piloting a collaboratively generated, initial research tool to evaluate cross-sectoral mental health services. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 27(13), 781726. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2022.781726
98.
von PeterS.SchwarzJ.BechdolfA.BirkerT.DeisterA.IgnatyevY.Schulz-Du BoisA.HeinzeM.TimmJ. (2021). Analyse von Implementierungsmerkmalen psychiatrischer Modellvorhaben (nach §64b SGB V) in Schleswig-Holstein im Vergleich zum Bundesgebiet. Das Gesundheitswesen, 83(1), 33–39. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-0945-9851
99.
WallcraftJ.SchrankB.AmeringM. (2009). Handbook of service user involvement in mental health research. Wiley.
100.
WheelerC.Lloyd-EvansB.ChurchardA.FitzgeraldC.FullartonK.MosseL.PatersonB.ZugaroC. G.JohnsonS. (2015). Implementation of the Crisis Resolution Team model in adult mental health settings: A systematic review. BMC Psychiatry, 15(1), 74. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-015-0441-x
WullschlegerA.BergJ.BermpohlF.MontagC. (2018). Can “model projects of need-adapted care” reduce involuntary hospital treatment and the use of coercive measures?Frontiers in Psychiatry, 9, 168. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00168
