Please note this application is under active development. If you spot any errors or something isn't working, please contact us at evidence.service@wales.nhs.uk.

Exploring the effect of case management per components: a systematic review of effectiveness and implementation, with meta-analysis and thematic synthesis

Weightman et al. (2023)

Campbell Systematic Reviews - doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1329

Evidence Categories

  • Care setting: Community setting
  • Population group: Homeless
  • Intervention: Case management
  • Outcome: social, emotional or mental wellbeing

Type of Evidence

Systematic Review

Aims

To summarise the best available evidence relating to the components of case-management interventions for people experiencing homelessness (PEH) via a mixed methods review that explored both the effectiveness of interventions and factors that may influence its impact.

Findings

Main Results

We included 64 intervention studies and 41 implementation studies. The evidence base was dominated by studies from the USA and Canada. Participants were largely (though not exclusively) people who were literally homeless, that is, living on the streets or in shelters, and who had additional support needs. Many studies were assessed as having a medium or high risk of bias. However, there was some consistency in outcomes across studies that improved confidence in the main findings.

Case Management and Mental Health Outcomes

The overall evidence suggested that case management of any description was not more or less effective compared to usual care for an individual's mental health (SMD = 0.02 [−0.15, 0.18]; p = 0.817).

Case Management and Other Outcomes

Based on meta-analyses, case management was superior to usual care for capability and wellbeing outcomes up to 1 year (an improvement of around one-third of an SMD; p < 0.01) but was not statistically significantly different for substance use outcomes, physical health, and employment.

Conclusions

Case management interventions improve housing outcomes for PEH with one or more additional support needs, with more intense interventions leading to greater benefits. Those with greater support needs may gain greater benefit. There is also evidence for improvements to capabilities and wellbeing. Current approaches do not appear to lead to mental health benefits. In terms of case management components, there is evidence in support of a team approach and in-person meetings and, from the implementation evidence, that conditions associated with service provision should be minimised. The approach within Housing First could explain the finding that overall benefits may be greater than for other types of case management. Four of its principles were identified as key themes within the implementation studies: No conditionality, offer choice, provide an individualised approach and support community building. Recommendations for further research include an expansion of the research base outside North America and further exploration of case management components and intervention cost-effectiveness.

Also In This Category

    No other evidence in this category.