Recent research suggests that, despite the development of effective psychiatric treatment, there is marked underuse of care. This pilot study had the objective of dissecting the process of care in an attempt to understand outcomes for patients with major affective disorder and for their families. Twenty-four patients with a DSM-III diagnosis of major affective disorder were identified 12 to 18 months after hospital admission in three countries (Italy, Japan, and the United States). The patients, their families, and their doctors were interviewed separately and then together, using instruments measuring delivery of treatment (using an ideal treatment criteria set) and percentage of achievement of treatment goals. These measures were then (using parametric and nonparametric statistics) correlated with resolution of the index episode and the patient's global outcome (using the Global Assessment Scale). The data demonstrated that physicians delivered about half (52%) and, subsequently, achieved about half (54%) of what would be considered ideal care to patients and other family members. The mean resolution of the index episode at follow-up was only 3.0 (on a 0- to 5-point scale). There was a significant positive association between the most important outcome measure, i.e., the resolution of the episode, and the achievement of treatment goals for both the patient (p < .07) and the family (p < .005). Patients and families with the best resolutions received significantly more good treatment than those with the worst resolutions (p < .02), most notably with regard to medication (p < .002).
