Patient involvement in primary care mental health:a focus group study

Background: Patient involvement in health care is a strong political driver in the NHS. However in spite of policy prominence, there has been only limited previous work exploring patient involvement for people with serious mental illness. Aim: To describe the views on, potential for, and types of patient involvement in primary care from the perspectives of primary care health professionals and patients with serious mental illness. Design of study: Qualitative study consisting of six patient, six health professional and six combined focus groups between May 2002 and January 2003. Setting: Six primary care trusts in the West Midlands, England. Method: Forty-five patients with serious mental illness, 39 GPs, and eight practice nurses participated in a series of 18 focus groups. All focus groups were audiotaped and fully transcribed. Nvivo was used to manage data more effectively. Results: Most patients felt that only other people with lived experience of mental illness could understand what they were going through. This experience could be used to help others navigate the health- and social-care systems, give advice about medication, and offer support at times of crisis. Many patients also saw paid employment within primary care as a way of addressing issues of poverty and social exclusion. Health professionals were, however, more reluctant to see patients as partners, be it in the consultation or in service delivery. Conclusions: Meaningful change in patient involvement requires commitment and belief from primary care practitioners that the views and experiences of people with serious mental illness are valid and valuable.

Medicines reconciliation in comparison with NICE guidelines across secondary care mental health organisations

Background Medicines reconciliation-identifying and maintaining an accurate list of a patient's current medications-should be undertaken at all transitions of care and available to all patients. Objective A self-completion web survey was conducted for chief pharmacists (or equivalent) to evaluate medicines reconciliation levels in secondary care mental health organisations. Setting The survey was sent to secondary care mental health organisations in England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. Method The survey was launched via Bristol Online Surveys. Quantitative data was analysed using descriptive statistics and qualitative data was collected through respondents free-text answers to specific questions. Main outcomes measure Investigate how medicines reconciliation is delivered, incorporate a clear description of the role of pharmacy staff and identify areas of concern. Results Forty-two (52 % response rate) surveys were completed. Thirty-seven (88.1 %) organisations have a formal policy for medicines reconciliation with defined steps. Results show that the pharmacy team (pharmacists and pharmacy technicians) are the main professionals involved in medicines reconciliation with a high rate of doctors also involved. Training procedures frequently include an induction by pharmacy for doctors whilst the pharmacy team are generally trained by another member of pharmacy. Mental health organisations estimate that nearly 80 % of medicines reconciliation is carried out within 24 h of admission. A full medicines reconciliation is not carried out on patient transfer between mental health wards; instead quicker and less exhaustive variations are implemented. 71.4 % of organisations estimate that pharmacy staff conduct daily medicine reconciliations for acute admission wards (Monday to Friday). However, only 38 % of organisations self-report to pharmacy reconciling patients' medication for other teams that admit from primary care. Conclusion Most mental health organisations appear to be complying with NICE guidance on medicines reconciliation for their acute admission wards. However, medicines reconciliation is conducted less frequently on other units that admit from primary care and rarely completed on transfer when it significantly differs to that on admission. Formal training and competency assessments on medicines reconciliation should be considered as current training varies and adherence to best practice is questionable.

A study of outcomes measures in forensic mental health

Outcomes measures, which is the measurement of effectiveness of interventions and services has been propelled onto the health service agenda since the introduction of the internal market in the 1990s. It arose as a result of the escalating cost of inpatient care, the need to identify what interventions work and in what situations, and the desire for effective information by service users enabled by the consumerist agenda introduced by Working for Patients white paper. The research reported in this thesis is an assessment of the readiness of the forensic mental health service to measure outcomes of interventions. The research examines the type, prevalence and scope of use of outcomes measures, and further seeks a consensus of views of key stakeholders on the priority areas for future development. It discusses the theoretical basis for defining health and advocates the argument that the present focus on measuring effectiveness of care is misdirected without the input of users, particularly patients in their care, drawing together the views of the many stakeholders who have an interest in the provision of care in the service. The research further draws on the theory of structuration to demonstrate the degree to which a duality of action, which is necessary for the development, and use of outcomes measures is in place within the service. Consequently, it highlights some of the hurdles that need to be surmounted before effective measurement of health gain can be developed in the field of study. It concludes by advancing the view that outcomes research can enable practitioners to better understand the relationship between the illness of the patient and the efficacy of treatment. This understanding it is argued would contribute to improving dialogue between the health care practitioner and the patient, and further providing the information necessary for moving away from untested assumptions, which are numerous in the field about the superiority of one treatment approach over another.

Knowledge engineering for mental-health risk assessment and decision support

Mental-health risk assessment practice in the UK is mainly paper-based, with little standardisation in the tools that are used across the Services. The tools that are available tend to rely on minimal sets of items and unsophisticated scoring methods to identify at-risk individuals. This means the reasoning by which an outcome has been determined remains uncertain. Consequently, there is little provision for: including the patient as an active party in the assessment process, identifying underlying causes of risk, and eecting shared decision-making. This thesis develops a tool-chain for the formulation and deployment of a computerised clinical decision support system for mental-health risk assessment. The resultant tool, GRiST, will be based on consensual domain expert knowledge that will be validated as part of the research, and will incorporate a proven psychological model of classication for risk computation. GRiST will have an ambitious remit of being a platform that can be used over the Internet, by both the clinician and the layperson, in multiple settings, and in the assessment of patients with varying demographics. Flexibility will therefore be a guiding principle in the development of the platform, to the extent that GRiST will present an assessment environment that is tailored to the circumstances in which it nds itself. XML and XSLT will be the key technologies that help deliver this exibility.

Psychiatric adverse effects of zonisamide in patients with epilepsy and mental disorder comorbidities

Over the last few years, zonisamide has been proposed as a potentially useful medication for patients with focal seizures, with or without secondary generalization. Since psychiatric adverse effects, including mania, psychosis, and suicidal ideation, have been associated with its use, it was suggested that the presence of antecedent psychiatric disorders is an important factor associated with the discontinuation of zonisamide therapy in patients with epilepsy. We, therefore, set out to assess the tolerability profile of zonisamide in a retrospective chart review of 23 patients with epilepsy and comorbid mental disorders, recruited from two specialist pediatric (n=11) and adult (n=12) neuropsychiatry clinics. All patients had a clinical diagnosis of treatment-refractory epilepsy after extensive neurophysiological and neuroimaging investigations. The vast majority of patients (n=22/23, 95.7%) had tried previous antiepileptic medications, and most adult patients (n=9/11, 81.8%) were on concomitant medication for epilepsy. In the majority of cases, the psychiatric adverse effects of zonisamide were not severe. Four patients (17.4%) discontinued zonisamide because of lack of efficacy, whereas only one patient (4.3%) discontinued it because of the severity of psychiatric adverse effects (major depressive disorder). The low discontinuation rate of zonisamide in a selected population of patients with epilepsy and neuropsychiatric comorbidity suggests that this medication is safe and reasonably well-tolerated for use in patients with treatment-refractory epilepsy. Given the limitations of the present study, including the relatively small sample size, further research is warranted to confirm this finding. © 2013 Elsevier Inc.

Medication reconciliation by a pharmacy technician in a mental health assessment unit

Background: Medication discrepancies are common when patients cross organisational boundaries. However, little is known about the frequency of discrepancies within mental health and the efficacy of interventions to reduce discrepancies. Objective: To evaluate the impact of a pharmacy-led reconciliation service on medication discrepancies on admissions to a secondary care mental health trust. Setting: In-patient mental health services. Methods: Prospective evaluation of pharmacy technician led medication reconciliation for admissions to a UK Mental Health NHS Trust. From March to June 2012 information on any unintentional discrepancies (dose, frequency and name of medication); patient demographics; and type and cause of the discrepancy was collected. The potential for harm was assessed based on two scenarios; the discrepancy was continued into primary care, and the discrepancy was corrected during admission. Logistic regression identified factors associated with discrepancies. Main outcome measure: Mean number of discrepancies per admission corrected by the pharmacy technician. Results Unintentional medication discrepancies occurred in 212 of 377 admissions (56.2 %). Discrepancies involving 569 medicines (mean 1.5 medicines per admission) were corrected. The most common discrepancy was omission (n = 464). Severity was assessed for 114 discrepancies. If the discrepancy was corrected within 16 days the potential harm was minor in 71 (62.3 %) cases and moderate in 43 (37.7 %) cases whereas if the discrepancy was not corrected the potential harm was minor in 27 (23.7 %) cases and moderate in 87 (76.3 %) cases. Discrepancies were associated with both age and number of medications; the stronger association was age. Conclusions: Medication discrepancies are common within mental health services with potentially significant consequences for patients. Trained pharmacy technicians are able to reduce the frequency of discrepancies, improving safety. © 2013 Koninklijke Nederlandse Maatschappij ter bevordering der Pharmacie.

Examining the relationship between risk assessment and risk management in mental health

Risk assessment is crucial for developing risk management plans to prevent or minimize mental health patients' risks that will impede their recovery. Risk assessments and risk management plans should be closely linked. Their content and the extent to which they are linked within one Trust is explored. There is a great deal of variability in the amount and detail of risk information collected by nurses and how this is used to develop risk management plans. Keeping risk assessment information in one place rather than scattered throughout patient records is important for ensuring it can be accessed easily and linked properly to risk management plans. Strengthening the link between risk assessment and management will help ensure interventions and care is tailored to the specific needs of individual patients, thus promoting their safety and well-being. Thorough risk assessment helps in developing risk management plans that minimize risks that can impede mental health patients' recovery. Department of Health policy states that risk assessments and risk management plans should be inextricably linked. This paper examines their content and linkage within one Trust. Four inpatient wards for working age adults (18-65 years) in a large mental health Trust in England were included in the study. Completed risk assessment forms, for all patients in each inpatient ward were examined (n= 43), followed by an examination of notes for the same patients. Semi-structured interviews took place with ward nurses (n= 17). Findings show much variability in the amount and detail of risk information collected by nurses, which may be distributed in several places. Gaps in the risk assessment and risk management process are evident, and a disassociation between risk information and risk management plans is often present. Risk information should have a single location so that it can be easily found and updated. Overall, a more integrated approach to risk assessment and management is required, to help patients receive timely and appropriate interventions that can reduce risks such as suicide or harm to others. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing.

Using XML and XSLT for flexible elicitation of mental-health risk knowledge

Current tools for assessing risks associated with mental-health problems require assessors to make high-level judgements based on clinical experience. This paper describes how new technologies can enhance qualitative research methods to identify lower-level cues underlying these judgements, which can be collected by people without a specialist mental-health background. Content analysis of interviews with 46 multidisciplinary mental-health experts exposed the cues and their interrelationships, which were represented by a mind map using software that stores maps as XML. All 46 mind maps were integrated into a single XML knowledge structure and analysed by a Lisp program to generate quantitative information about the numbers of experts associated with each part of it. The knowledge was refined by the experts, using software developed in Flash to record their collective views within the XML itself. These views specified how the XML should be transformed by XSLT, a technology for rendering XML, which resulted in a validated hierarchical knowledge structure associating patient cues with risks. Changing knowledge elicitation requirements were accommodated by flexible transformations of XML data using XSLT, which also facilitated generation of multiple data-gathering tools suiting different assessment circumstances and levels of mental-health knowledge. © 2007 Informa UK Ltd All rights reserved.

Medication errors in mental healthcare:a systematic review

Methods: It has been estimated that medication error harms 1-2% of patients admitted to general hospitals. There has been no previous systematic review of the incidence, cause or type of medication error in mental healthcare services. Methods: A systematic literature search for studies that examined the incidence or cause of medication error in one or more stage(s) of the medication-management process in the setting of a community or hospital-based mental healthcare service was undertaken. The results in the context of the design of the study and the denominator used were examined. Results: All studies examined medication management processes, as opposed to outcomes. The reported rate of error was highest in studies that retrospectively examined drug charts, intermediate in those that relied on reporting by pharmacists to identify error and lowest in those that relied on organisational incident reporting systems. Only a few of the errors identified by the studies caused actual harm, mostly because they were detected and remedial action was taken before the patient received the drug. The focus of the research was on inpatients and prescriptions dispensed by mental health pharmacists. Conclusion: Research about medication error in mental healthcare is limited. In particular, very little is known about the incidence of error in non-hospital settings or about the harm caused by it. Evidence is available from other sources that a substantial number of adverse drug events are caused by psychotropic drugs. Some of these are preventable and might probably, therefore, be due to medication error. On the basis of this and features of the organisation of mental healthcare that might predispose to medication error, priorities for future research are suggested.

Patients' and health professionals' views on primary care for people with serious mental illness:focus group study

Objective: To explore the experience of providing and receiving primary care from the perspectives of primary care health professionals and patients with serious mental illness respectively. Design: Qualitative study consisting of six patient groups, six health professional groups, and six combined focus groups. Setting: Six primary care trusts in the West Midlands. Participants: Forty five patients with serious mental illness, 39 general practitioners (GPs), and eight practice nurses. Results: Most health professionals felt that the care of people with serious mental illness was too specialised for primary care. However, most patients viewed primary care as the cornerstone of their health care and preferred to consult their own GP, who listened and was willing to learn, rather than be referred to a different GP with specific mental health knowledge. Swift access was important to patients, with barriers created by the effects of the illness and the noisy or crowded waiting area. Some patients described how they exaggerated symptoms ("acted up") to negotiate an urgent appointment, a strategy that was also employed by some GPs to facilitate admission to secondary care. Most participants felt that structured reviews of care had value. However, whereas health professionals perceived serious mental illness as a lifelong condition, patients emphasised the importance of optimism in treatment and hope for recovery. Conclusions: Primary care is of central importance to people with serious mental illness. The challenge for health professionals and patients is to create a system in which patients can see a health professional when they want to without needing to exaggerate their symptoms. The importance that patients attach to optimism in treatment, continuity of care, and listening skills compared with specific mental health knowledge should encourage health professionals in primary care to play a greater role in the care of patients with serious mental illness.

Investigating mental health risk assessment in primary care and the potential role of a structured decision support tool, GRiST

Aim: To explore current risk assessment processes in general practice and Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) services, and to consider whether the Galatean Risk and Safety Tool (GRiST) can help support improved patient care. Background: Much has been written about risk assessment practice in secondary mental health care, but little is known about how it is undertaken at the beginning of patients' care pathways, within general practice and IAPT services. Methods: Interviews with eight general practice and eight IAPT clinicians from two primary care trusts in the West Midlands, UK, and eight service users from the same region. Interviews explored current practice and participants' views and experiences of mental health risk assessment. Two focus groups were also carried out, one with general practice and one with IAPT clinicians, to review interview findings and to elicit views about GRiST from a demonstration of its functionality. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. Findings Variable approaches to mental health risk assessment were observed. Clinicians were anxious that important risk information was being missed, and risk communication was undermined. Patients felt uninvolved in the process, and both clinicians and patients expressed anxiety about risk assessment skills. Clinicians were positive about the potential for GRiST to provide solutions to these problems. Conclusions: A more structured and systematic approach to risk assessment in general practice and IAPT services is needed, to ensure important risk information is captured and communicated across the care pathway. GRiST has the functionality to support this aspect of practice.

Handling varying amounts of missing data when classifying mental-health risk levels

One of the main challenges of classifying clinical data is determining how to handle missing features. Most research favours imputing of missing values or neglecting records that include missing data, both of which can degrade accuracy when missing values exceed a certain level. In this research we propose a methodology to handle data sets with a large percentage of missing values and with high variability in which particular data are missing. Feature selection is effected by picking variables sequentially in order of maximum correlation with the dependent variable and minimum correlation with variables already selected. Classification models are generated individually for each test case based on its particular feature set and the matching data values available in the training population. The method was applied to real patients' anonymous mental-health data where the task was to predict the suicide risk judgement clinicians would give for each patient's data, with eleven possible outcome classes: zero to ten, representing no risk to maximum risk. The results compare favourably with alternative methods and have the advantage of ensuring explanations of risk are based only on the data given, not imputed data. This is important for clinical decision support systems using human expertise for modelling and explaining predictions.

Understanding data collection behaviour of mental health practitioners

Failure to detect patients at risk of attempting suicide can result in tragic consequences. Identifying risks earlier and more accurately helps prevent serious incidents occurring and is the objective of the GRiST clinical decision support system (CDSS). One of the problems it faces is high variability in the type and quantity of data submitted for patients, who are assessed in multiple contexts along the care pathway. Although GRiST identifies up to 138 patient cues to collect, only about half of them are relevant for any one patient and their roles may not be for risk evaluation but more for risk management. This paper explores the data collection behaviour of clinicians using GRiST to see whether it can elucidate which variables are important for risk evaluations and when. The GRiST CDSS is based on a cognitive model of human expertise manifested by a sophisticated hierarchical knowledge structure or tree. This structure is used by the GRiST interface to provide top-down controlled access to the patient data. Our research explores relationships between the answers given to these higher-level 'branch' questions to see whether they can help direct assessors to the most important data, depending on the patient profile and assessment context. The outcome is a model for dynamic data collection driven by the knowledge hierarchy. It has potential for improving other clinical decision support systems operating in domains with high dimensional data that are only partially collected and in a variety of combinations.

Pathway to clozapine use:a comparison between a patient cohort from New Zealand and a cohort from the United Kingdom

Background and Objective: Clozapine has been available since the early 1990s. Studies continue to demonstrate its superior efficacy in treatment-resistant schizophrenia. Despite this, numerous studies show under-utilisation, delayed access and reluctance by psychiatrists to prescribe clozapine. This retrospective cross-sectional study compared the prescribing of clozapine in two adult cohorts under the care of large public mental health services in Auckland (New Zealand) and Birmingham (United Kingdom) on 31 March 2007. Method: Time from first presentation to clozapine initiation, prior antipsychotics trialled and antipsychotic co-prescribing were compared. Data included demographics, psychiatric diagnosis, co-morbid conditions, year of first presentation, admissions and pharmacological treatment (clozapine dose, start date, prior antipsychotics, co-prescribed antipsychotic). Results: Overall, 664 people were prescribed clozapine (402 Auckland; 262 Birmingham); mean daily dose of 384 mg (Auckland) and 429 mg (Birmingham). 53 % presented after 1990 and the average duration of time before starting clozapine was significantly longer in the Birmingham cohort (6.5 vs. 5.3 years) but this reduced in both cohorts to a 1-year mean in those presenting within the last 3 years. The average number of antipsychotics trialled pre-clozapine for those presenting since 1990 was significantly higher in the Birmingham cohort (4.3 vs. 3.1) but in both cohorts this similarly reduced in those presenting within the last 3 years. Antipsychotic co-prescribing was significantly higher in the Birmingham cohort (22.9 vs. 10.7 %). Conclusions: There is evidence that access to clozapine has improved over time in both cohorts, with a reduction in the duration between presentation and initiation of clozapine and number of different antipsychotics trialled pre-clozapine. These are very positive findings in terms of optimising outcomes with clozapine and are possibly due to the impact of guideline recommendations, increasing clinician, consumer and carer knowledge, and experience with clozapine and funding changes. © 2014 Springer International Publishing.

Integrating service user and practitioner expertise within a web-based system for collaborative mental-health risk and safety management

Objectives: To develop a decision support system (DSS), myGRaCE, that integrates service user (SU) and practitioner expertise about mental health and associated risks of suicide, self-harm, harm to others, self-neglect, and vulnerability. The intention is to help SUs assess and manage their own mental health collaboratively with practitioners. Methods: An iterative process involving interviews, focus groups, and agile software development with 115 SUs, to elicit and implement myGRaCE requirements. Results: Findings highlight shared understanding of mental health risk between SUs and practitioners that can be integrated within a single model. However, important differences were revealed in SUs' preferred process of assessing risks and safety, which are reflected in the distinctive interface, navigation, tool functionality and language developed for myGRaCE. A challenge was how to provide flexible access without overwhelming and confusing users. Conclusion: The methods show that practitioner expertise can be reformulated in a format that simultaneously captures SU expertise, to provide a tool highly valued by SUs. A stepped process adds necessary structure to the assessment, each step with its own feedback and guidance. Practice Implications: The GRiST web-based DSS (www.egrist.org) links and integrates myGRaCE self-assessments with GRiST practitioner assessments for supporting collaborative and self-managed healthcare.