CSIRO Publishing blank image blank image blank image blank imageBooksblank image blank image blank image blank imageJournalsblank image blank image blank image blank imageAbout Usblank image blank image blank image blank imageShopping Cartblank image blank image blank image You are here: Journals > Australian Health Review   
Australian Health Review
http://www.aushealthcare.com.au/
  Journal of the Australian Healthcare & Hospitals Association
 
blank image Search
 
blank image blank image
blank image
 
  Advanced Search
   

Journal Home
About the Journal
Editorial Board
Contacts
For Advertisers
Content
Online Early
Current Issue
Just Accepted
All Issues
Sample Issue
For Authors
General Information
Instructions to Authors
Submit Article
Open Access
For Referees
Referee Guidelines
Review an Article
Annual Referee Index
Call for Reviewers
For Subscribers
Subscription Prices
Customer Service
Print Publication Dates

blue arrow e-Alerts
blank image
Subscribe to our Email Alert or RSS feeds for the latest journal papers.

red arrow Connect with AHR
blank image
facebook   TwitterIcon

red arrow Connect with CP
blank image
facebook twitter youtube

 

Article << Previous     |     Next >>   Contents Vol 37(3)

How mental health clinicians want to evaluate the care they give: a Western Australian study

Sophie Davison A B E , Yvonne Hauck A C , Philippa Martyr A B and Daniel Rock A B D

A Clinical Applications Unit, North Metropolitan Area Health Service (Mental Health), Gascoyne House, John XXIII Ave, Mt Claremont, WA 6010, Australia. Email: yvonne.hauck@health.wa.gov.au, Philippa.Martyr@health.wa.gov.au, daniel.rock@health.wa.gov.au
B School of Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia.
C Curtin Health Innovation Research Institute (CHIRI), Curtin University, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia.
D School of Population Health, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia.
E Corresponding author. Email sophie.davison@health.wa.gov.au

Australian Health Review 37(3) 375-380 http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/AH12171
Submitted: 11 April 2012  Accepted: 21 November 2012   Published: 22 April 2013


 
PDF (125 KB) $25
 Export Citation
 Print
  
Abstract

Objectives. To explore how Western Australian mental health clinicians want to evaluate their care.

Methods. Using a participatory action research framework, 10 senior psychiatrists and 11 clinical nurse specialists working in an inpatient mental health setting participated in individual interviews, focus groups and meetings. All interviews were de-identified during transcription and transcripts and field notes were analysed for common themes.

Results. Participants identified what they wanted to measure, how they wanted to measure it and how these changes could be implemented. Clinicians stressed the importance of measuring context (physical, clinical and service) and process as well as outcome, and of evaluating care at an individual and service level with consumer involvement.

What is known about the topic? Completion rates of mandatory national outcome measures in mental health in Australia are variable and clinicians have mixed views as to their value. Several barriers have been identified as to their use including clinical, resource and ownership issues.

What does this paper add? Some studies have identified areas of good practice and elicited practical suggestions for improvement but few have asked clinicians how they actually want to evaluate the care they provide. This study explored how mental health clinicians wanted to evaluate their care, using a participatory action research framework that encouraged participants to pinpoint problems and issues, account for their social context and develop actions to address them.

What are the implications for practitioners? Clinicians were enthusiastic for high quality care and evaluation, but pessimistic about their ability to introduce sustainable change. Establishing and supporting active and responsible leadership at service level may solve this, as may encouraging local standard setting and benchmarking in collaboration with consumers and carers.

Additional keywords: care-planning, outcome, quality.


References

[1]  Jacobs R. Investigating patient outcome measures in mental health. CHE Research Paper 48. York, UK: Centre for Health Economics, University of York; 2009.

[2]  Holloway F. Outcome measurement in mental health- welcome to the revolution. Br J Psychiatry 2002; 181: 1–2.
CrossRef | PubMed |

[3]  Coombs T, Stapley K, Pirkis J. The multiple uses of routine mental health outcome measures in Australia and New Zealand: experiences from the field. Australas Psychiatry 2011; 19: 247–53.
CrossRef | PubMed |

[4]  Australia DoHGoW. Western Australia’s clinician’s guide to outcome measurement: adult and older persons. Perth: Office of Mental Health, Department of Health; 2003.

[5]  Gilbody S, House A, Sheldon T. Psychiatrists in the UK do not use outcome measures. Br J Psychiatry 2002; 180: 101–3.
CrossRef | PubMed |

[6]  Meehan T, McCombes S, Hatzipetrouli L, Catchpoole R. Introduction of routine outcome measures: staff reactions and issues for consideration. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs 2006; 13: 581–7.
CrossRef | CAS | PubMed |

[7]  Garland A, Kruse M, Aarons G. Clinicians and outcome measurement: what’s the use? J Behav Health Serv Res 2003; 30: 393–405.
CrossRef | PubMed |

[8]  Slade M. Routine outcome assessment in mental health services. Psychological Medicine 2002; 32: 1339–43.
| PubMed |

[9]  Callaly T, Hyland M, Coombs T, Trauer T. Routine outcome measurement in public mental health: results of a clinician survey. Aust Health Rev 2006; 30: 164–73.
CrossRef | PubMed |

[10]  Black J, Lewis T, McIntosh P, Callaly T, Coombs T, Hunter A, et al It’s not that bad: the views of consumers and carers about routine outcome measurement in mental health. Aust Health Rev 2009; 33: 93–9.
CrossRef | PubMed |

[11]  Walter G, Cleary M, Rey JM. Attitudes of mental health personnel towards rating outcome. J Qual Clin Pract 1998; 18: 109–15.
| CAS | PubMed |

[12]  Trauer T, Gill L, Pedwell G, Slattery P. Routine outcome measurement in public mental health- what do clinicians think? Aust Health Rev 2006; 30: 144–7.
CrossRef | PubMed |

[13]  Auditor General Western Australia. Adult community mental health teams: availability, accessibility and effectiveness of services. Report 10. Perth: Auditor general WA; 2009.

[14]  Valenstein M, Mitchinson A, Ronis DL, Alexander JA, Duffy SA, Craig TJ, et al Quality indicators and monitoring of mental health services: what do frontline providers think? Am J Psychiatry 2004; 161: 146–53.
CrossRef | PubMed |

[15]  Chenail R, St George S, Wulff D. Action research: the methodologies. In: Munhall P, editor. Nursing research: a qualitative perspective. Sudbury: Jones and Bartlett; 2007. pp. 447–61.

[16]  Charmaz K. Constructing grounded theory: a practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage; 2006.

[17]  Jupp V. Methods in criminological research. Bulmer M, editor. London: Routledge; 1989.

[18]  MacNee CL, McCabe S. Understanding nursing research: reading and using research in evidence-based practice. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2008.

[19]  Thornicroft G, Tansella M. The mental health matrix. A manual to improve services. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1999.

[20]  Donabedian A. The quality of care. How can it be assessed? JAMA 1988; 260: 1743–8.
CrossRef | CAS | PubMed |

[21]  Richardson A, Cotton R. No health without mental health: developing an outcomes-based approach. London: Mental Health Network NHS Confederation; 2011.

[22]  Hansson L. Outcome assessment in psychiatric service evaluation. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 2001; 36: 244–8.
CrossRef | CAS | PubMed |

[23]  Drake RE, Deegan PE, Rapp C. The promise of shared decision making in mental health. Psychiatr Rehabil J 2010; 34: 7–13.
CrossRef | PubMed |

[24]  Henderson C, Flood C, Leese M, Thornicroft G, Sutherby K, Szmukler G. Effect of joint crisis plans on use of compulsory treatment in psychiatry: Single blind randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2004; 329: 136–8.
CrossRef | PubMed |

[25]  Lawn S, Battersby MW, Pols RG, Lawrence J, Parry T, Urukalo M. The mental health expert patient: findings from a pilot study of a generic chronic condition self-management programme for people with mental illness. Int J Soc Psychiatry 2007; 53: 63–74.
CrossRef | PubMed |

[26]  Gagliardi AR, Lemieux-Charles L, Brown AD, Sullivan T, Goel V. Barriers to patient involvement in health service planning and evaluation: an exploratory study. Patient Educ Couns 2008; 70: 234–41.
CrossRef | PubMed |

[27]  Restall G, Strutt C. Participation in planning and evaluating mental health services: building capacity. Psychiatr Rehabil J 2008; 31: 234–8.
CrossRef | PubMed |

[28]  Linhorst DM, Eckert A. Involving people with severe mental illness in evaluation and performance improvement. Eval Health Prof 2002; 25: 284–301.
CrossRef | PubMed |

[29]  Lakeman R.. Standardized routine outcome measurement: pot holes in the road to recovery. Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2004; 13: 210–5.
| PubMed |

[30]  Aoun S, Pennebaker D, Janca A. Outcome measurement in rural mental health care: a field trial of rooming-in models. Aust J Rural Health 2002; 10: 302–7.
CrossRef | PubMed |

[31]  Shields R. Use of mental health outcome measures in clinical practice. Australas Psychiatry 2012; 20: 69.
CrossRef | PubMed |


   
Subscriber Login
Username:
Password:  

 


    
Legal & Privacy | Contact Us | Help

CSIRO

© CSIRO 1996-2014