Prevention and Recovery Care Services in Australia: Developing a State-Wide Typology of a Subacute Residential Mental Health Service Model

Aims: Community-based residential alternatives to hospitalisation are an emerging service model. Evidence for their acceptability and effectiveness is promising but limited. Prevention and Recovery Care (PARC) services are one such residential model, offering short-term sub-acute treatment and care (usually between 7 and 28 days). PARC services in Victoria, Australia, are designed to support consumers with severe mental illness to either avoid a psychiatric hospital admission (step-up care) or transition from hospital back into the community (step-down care). As a precursor to a series of studies investigating the appropriateness, effectiveness and efficiency of PARC services, we aimed to investigate whether a typology of PARC services can be developed. Materials and methods: A manager or other appropriately knowledgeable staff member from each of the 19 adult PARC services included in the study completed a tool based on PARC operational guidelines (the Victorian PARC service mapping questionnaire), and a validated instrument measuring the quality of care in residential mental health settings (the Quality Indicator for Rehabilitative Care, QuIRC). Twenty-nine stakeholders participated in a modified Delphi study to select 23 from the available 230 variables for entry into a hierarchical cluster analysis. Results: Cluster analysis produced three clusters of equal dissimilarity. At the 90% confidence level, there were 4 variables which were significantly different between clusters. These were the year the PARC was opened, the QuIRC Living Environment domain score, the proportion of all admissions that were a step-down admission from an inpatient unit, and how often families were invited to care meetings. Sensitivity analyses suggested the findings were robust to the method used to identify clusters. Discussion: Although PARC services were broadly similar, their identified differences suggest there is variable model implementation across Victoria which may prove important for consumer and carer outcomes. The value of conducting service mapping and typology studies is underscored. Further research to characterise sub-acute residential services, including recovery-promoting features of the built environment, is warranted.