Intensive community care services (ICCS) provide home and community care for people suffering from psychological distress. These services offer an alternative to (often coercive) inpatient psychiatric treatment. A new meta-analysis published in the Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry finds that ICCS offer a promising alternative to inpatient psychiatric treatment for adolescents with severe mental health issues. This research, led by Shabeer Syed from University College London, suggests that ICCS could reduce inpatient admission days and emotional and behavioral problems while improving psychosocial functioning compared to treatment as usual. The authors write:
“This systematic review and meta-analysis of 11 RCTs showed that, for adolescents with severe mental health problems, ICCS were associated with reductions in hospital admission days and improved psychosocial functioning and externalizing symptoms compared with usual care. For psychosocial functioning, the effects remained significant when comparing ICCS with inpatient care only. For other outcomes—including family functioning, internalizing symptoms, clinician-rated severity, and cost—ICCS appeared to achieve results comparable to those of TAU, while also allowing adolescents to remain in the community.”
Alternatives to Inpatient Treatment
Experts have described inpatient psychiatric treatment, even when voluntary, as “extremely traumatizing and abusive.” A 2025 study found that patients and service users often reported adverse experiences during psychiatric hospitalization, describing these facilities as “dehumanizing and disempowering.” Patients and service users in inpatient psychiatric care are exposed to increased risk of sexual assault, which one expert called “commonplace” in mental health units. A lived experience expert described racist abuse in inpatient psychiatric settings saying “this problem of staff brutality towards patients on the psych wards disproportionately affects people of color and continues to happen every day behind locked doors.” Past research has also linked inpatient treatment to increased risk of suicide.
In response to the issues and failures of inpatient treatment, patients and service users are increasingly looking towards alternatives that allow for treatment in their homes and communities rather than a psych ward. Open dialogue, a home based treatment for people experiencing psychosis that involves families in mental health recovery, has shown promise in reducing future needs for mental health services and improving clinical collaboration.
Soteria houses, home-like residences designed as a non-coercive alternative to inpatient treatment for people diagnosed with schizophrenia and acute psychosis, have shown promise in reducing psychiatric readmission rates. This model has also expanded in some areas to treat other types of psychological distress, including mood, anxiety, substance use, and personality disorders.
Research has found that intensive home treatment delivered by psychiatric professionals in service users’ homes is linked to reduced readmission rates. Experts have said that peer respites, operating similarly to the Soteria model, can reduce the mental healthcare system’s reliance on institutional treatment. One study found that treatment involving families can reduce psychiatric admissions, with another reporting that home-based, family-involved treatment may be best for adolescents with symptoms of psychosis. Past research has also found that community based treatment can improve functioning, reduce disability, and improve quality of life.
Study Details
The goal of the current work was to assess whether ICCS are more effective than treatment as usual in improving outcomes for adolescents with significant mental health problems. The authors also wanted to identify the interventions commonly used in ICCS. They performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of previously published research on the topic of ICCS and mental health outcomes for adolescents.
Included research had to be quantitative studies published in English on January 1, 1999 or after where at least 70% of the participants were between 12 – 18 years old. The authors defined intensive community care as psychiatric treatment that involved a multidisciplinary team, was primarily based in the community, having at least two direct clinical contacts per week with provisions for on-call support, and was explicitly designed as an alternative to inpatient admission or to facilitate early discharge from inpatient treatment.
Not all studies included in the systematic review were also included in the meta-analysis. To be included in the meta-analysis, studies had to be randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared ICCS to treatment as usual, including inpatient or outpatient treatment. In total, the authors used data from 48 studies including 16,546 participants. Eleven RCTs were included in the meta-analysis.
ICCS often included emotional regulation and problem solving skills training (89% of included studies), cognitive behavioral therapy principles (86%), education around mental health concepts (86%), parent behavior management training (80%), and family therapy or systemic approaches (71%). Many of these interventions also involved collaborative goal setting, crisis management and safety training, flexible and persistent therapeutic approaches, and strong collaboration with the families of service users.
The meta-analysis revealed that the ICCS group had improved psychosocial functioning compared to the treatment as usual group. The effect was small (+ 0.15 of the standard deviation), but statistically significant. When comparing the ICCS group to only participants that had received inpatient psychiatric treatment, the improvement to psychosocial functioning increased, though the effect was still considered small (+ 0.25).
The ICCS group had less inpatient admission days compared to the treatment as usual group. This effect was moderate (- 0.48). The ICCS group also saw small improvements in total emotional and behavioral problems (- 0.15) and externalizing symptoms (- 0.18) such as aggression and conduct problems.
There was no statistically significant difference between groups in terms of family functioning, overall treatment costs, or internalizing symptoms such as depression or anxiety. ICCS showed modest improvements over treatment as usual in several areas and was not linked to increases in any negative outcomes examined by the authors of the current work or increased treatment costs. This means ICCS offers a promising alternative to inpatient care that allows adolescents to stay in their homes and communities during their treatment.
The authors developed a three phase model that they think explains how ICCS may improve outcomes. Phase one involves establishing trust, active engagement with the service user and their family, collaborative assessment and treatment planning, and encouraging hope. Phase two involves delivering appropriate interventions, a focus on improving emotional regulation and problem solving skills, and supporting family coping and functioning. Phase three includes preventing relapse and promoting self-efficacy. Essentially, the authors believe that effective community treatment requires more than simply providing therapy outside the hospital. It requires sustained engagement, family participation, flexible intervention delivery, and coordinated support through treatment and discharge. The authors conclude:
“Overall, the findings support ICCS expansion as a viable alternative to inpatient care for many adolescents. Future work should prioritize multisite RCTs with components of ICCS model comparisons, cost-effectiveness, and long-term outcomes, as well as developing psychosocial intervention guidelines.”
This research had several limitations. Included studies were significantly different in terms of the type of community care provided, severity of participants’ symptoms, outcomes measures, and follow-up periods. The included RCTs had some risk of bias, with three having a high risk. Most of the included studies came from high-income countries, limiting generalizability to other populations. Due to short follow-up periods, there was little evidence around long-term outcomes. There was also little evidence for specific intervention components and service models.
****
Syed, S., Pascual-Sanchez, A., Adesiyan, P., Rabot, K., Sanson, L., Eaton, R., & Ougrin, D. (2026). Systematic Review and meta-analysis: Effectiveness of intensive community care services and psychosocial interventions for adolescents with severe mental health problems. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. (Link)
