Table 1.
Operationalization of FIT components
| No. | Component | Operationalisation | Assessment |
|---|---|---|---|
| I | Shifting in- to outpatient setting Shift of treatment from I 1 towards D 2 and/or O 3 |
• Number of outpatient SoF4/total number SoF4 during EP5 | |
| II | Flexible care management across settings Unproblematic shift of SoF 4 (prompt, little bureaucracy |
• Number of CoT6 using all three SoF4 during EP5/ total number CoT6 • Treatment D2, I1, and/or O3 in the same unit (ward, level etc.) • Systematic steering of treatment beyond all SoFs4 • Application of SoF4 spanning roster and therapy plans |
Rating scale (0–2) |
| • Number SoF4-spanning sessions (meetings etc.) | Rating scale (1–3) | ||
| III | Continuity of treatment team Implementation of team- and individual-related continuity |
• Percentage of staff working in more than one SoF4 (on a regular basis) • Coordinated admission (coordinating staff member) • Coordination of treatment by e.g. case manager, SoF4-spanning care • Home treatment by I1- and D2- teams • Outsourced PIA (outpatient department) team (not working in I1 or D2) |
Rating scale (0–2) |
| IV | Multiprofessional Cooperation Intense multiprofessional cooperation |
• Absolute number of mandatory sessions across all occupational groups | Absolute number |
| • Measure/action to optimize cooperation across all occupational groups | Rating scale (0–1) | ||
| • Training sessions multiprofessional cooperation | |||
| • Number occupational groups working in home treatment (on a regular basis) | Rating scale (0–2) | ||
| V | Therapeutic group sessions across all settings Therapeutic groups with members from all SoF 4 |
• Number of group sessions open for all SoFs4 | Rating scale (0–2) |
| VI | Outreach home care Multiprofessional treatment at home ≥ 1 week |
• Number CoT6 with home-treatment/ all I1-cases during EP5 | |
| • Cars for home-visits | Rating scale (0–2) | ||
| VII | Involvement of informal caregivers Informal caregivers as therapeutic tool |
• “Network” or other forms of systemic dialog with informal caregivers and/or “carer-conference” and/or “caregiver groups” | Rating scale (0–1) |
| • Number of groups open for informal caregivers | Rating scale (0–1) | ||
| • Percentage of systemic training for staff/employees (e.g. open dialogue) | Percentage | ||
| VIII | Accessibility of services Geographical accessibility and accessibility of teams |
• Accessibility of services within one-hour drive • 24-h-accessibility of multiprofessional mental health team (not doctor on call or the like) • Shuttle service for services users |
Rating scale (0–2) |
| • Waiting list | Reverse rating scale (1–0) | ||
| IX | Sovereign steering of services Freedom of therapeutic decisions |
• Number of exeats ≥2 nights in a row/all exeats during EP • Number of exeats per service user/ calendar week during EP • Daypatient treatment as well during the night • Rules according to contract in all matters concerning setting of treatment and length of treatment |
Rating scale (0–2) |
| X | Cooperation across Sectors Cooperation with ambulant care systems |
• Mutual scheduling and realizing of treatment with ambulant care systems (SGB V) • Mutual scheduling and realizing of treatment with social welfare system (SGB XII) |
Rating scale (0–2) |
| • “Community psychiatric network” | Rating scale (0–1) | ||
| XI | Expansion of professional expertise Professionalisation of staff |
• Multiprofessional training of staff concerning FIT models • Measures to multiply knowledge about FIT models • FIT models as part of appraisal interviews |
Rating scale (0–1) |
| • Percentage of nurses/caregivers moderating group sessions | Percentage |
NOTE: 1I inpatient, 2D day-patient, 3O outpatient, 4SoF setting of treatment (outpatient, day-patient, inpatient), 5EP evaluation period, 6CoT case of treatment