Routine measurement of outcomes in Australia's public sector mental health services

OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the Australian experience to date with a national 'roll out' of routine outcome measurement in public sector mental health services. METHODS: Consultations were held with 123 stakeholders representing a range of roles. RESULTS: Australia has made an impressive start to nationally implementing routine outcome measurement in mental health services, although it still has a long way to go. All States/Territories have established data collection systems, although some are more streamlined than others. Significant numbers of clinicians and managers have been trained in the use of routine outcome measures, and thought is now being given to ongoing training strategies. Outcome measurement is now occurring 'on the ground'; all States/Territories will be reporting data for 2003-04, and a number have been doing so for several years. Having said this, there is considerable variability regarding data coverage, completeness and compliance. Some States/Territories have gone to considerable lengths to 'embed' outcome measurement in day-to-day practice. To date, reporting of outcome data has largely been limited to reports profiling individual consumers and/or aggregate reports that focus on compliance and data quality issues, although a few States/Territories have begun to turn their attention to producing aggregate reports of consumers by clinician, team or service. CONCLUSION: Routine outcome measurement is possible if it is supported by a co-ordinated, strategic approach and strong leadership, and there is commitment from clinicians and managers. The Australian experience can provide lessons for other countries.

Do adults in contact with Australia's public sector mental health services get better

This paper describes the outcomes of episodes of care for adults in public sector mental health services across Australia, with a view to informing the debate on service quality. Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) change scores and effect sizes were calculated for 14,659 acute inpatient episodes and 23,692 community episodes. The results showed that people in contact with public sector mental health services generally do get better, although the magnitude of improvement depends on the setting and episode type. This confirmatory finding is particularly positive, given current community concerns about the quality and effectiveness of mental health services.

It's not that bad : the views of consumers and carers about routine outcome measurement in mental health

The mandatory use of routine outcome measurement (ROM) has been introduced into all public sector mental health services in Australia over the past 6 years. Qualitative processes were used to engage consumers and carers in suggesting how the measures can be used in clinical practice. The project involved an audit by survey, followed by a range of interactive workshops designed to elicit the views of consumers, carers and clinicians, as well as to involve all parties in dialogue about ROM. In addition, there was engagement of consumers and carers in the training of clinicians in the clinical use of ROM, and in the production of promotional materials aimed at informing consumers and carers about ROM. When consumers and carers have had an opportunity to be involved in ROM they have found it a useful experience, and those who had not been involved can see the potential. Consumers and carers indicated that they believe the greatest opportunity arising from the suite of measures is the use of the consumer self-assessment measure the Behaviour and Symptom Identification Scale (BASIS-32).

Improving collaboration between private psychiatrists, the public mental health sector and general practitioners : evaluation of the Partnership Project

Objectives: We describe the evaluation of the Partnership Project, which was designed to improve linkages between public and private sector mental health services. We consider the Project's key elements: a Linkage Unit, designed to improve collaborative arrangements for consumers and promote systems-level and cultural change; and the expansion of private psychiatrists' roles to include supervision and training, case conferencing and secondary consultation. The evaluation aimed to describe the impacts and outcomes of these elements.

Method: The evaluation used de-identified data from the Linkage Unit database, the Project's billing system, and the Health Insurance Commission (HIC). It drew on consultations with key stakeholders (semistructured interviews with 36 key informants, and information from a forum attended by over 40 carers and a meeting of five public sector and three private sector psychiatrists) and a series of case studies.

Results: The Linkage Unit facilitated 224 episodes of collaborative care, many of which had positive outcomes for providers, consumers and carers. It had a significant impact at a systems level, raising consciousness about collaboration and influencing procedural changes. Thirty-two private psychiatrists consented to undertaking expanded roles, and the Project was billed $78 032 accordingly. Supervision and training were most common, involving 16 psychiatrists and accounting for approximately 80% of the total hours and cost. Commonwealth expenditure on private psychiatrists' participation in the expanded roles was not associated with a reduction in benefits paid by the HIC. Key informants were generally positive about the expanded roles.

Conclusions: The Project represented a considered, innovative approach to dealing with poor collaboration between the public mental health sector, private psychiatrists and GPs. The Linkage Unit achieved significant systems-level and cultural change, which has the potential to be sustained. Expanded roles for private psychiatrists, particularly supervision and training, may improve collaboration, and warrant further exploration in terms of costs and benefits.

Public and private psychiatry : can they work together and is it worth the effort?

OBJECTIVE: Partnerships in mental health care, particularly between public and private psychiatric services, are being increasingly recognized as important for optimizing patient management and the efficient organization of services. However, public sector mental health services and private psychiatrists do not always work well together and there seem to be a number of barriers to effective collaboration. This study set out to investigate the extent of collaborative 'shared care' arrangements between a public mental health service and private psychiatrists practising nearby. It also examined possible barriers to collaboration and some possible solutions to the identified problems.

METHOD: A questionnaire examining the above factors was sent to all public sector mental health clinicians and all private psychiatrists in the area.

RESULTS: One hundred and five of the 154 (68.2%) public sector clinicians and 103 of the 194 (53.1%) private psychiatrists returned surveys. The main barriers to successful collaboration identified by members of both sectors were: 'Difficulty communicating' endorsed by 71.4% of public clinicians and 72% of private psychiatrists, 'Confusion of roles and responsibilities' endorsed by 62.9% and 66%, respectively, and 'Different treatment approach' by 47.6% and 45.6%, respectively. Over 60% of private psychiatrists identified problems with access to the public system as a barrier to successful shared care arrangements. It also emerged, as hypothesized, that the public and private systems tend to manage different patient populations and that public clinicians in particular are not fully aware of the private psychiatrists' range of expertise. This would result in fewer referrals for shared care across the sectors.

CONCLUSIONS: A number of barriers to public sector clinicians and private psychiatrists collaborating in shared care arrangements were identified. The two groups surveyed identified similar barriers. Some of these can potentially be addressed by changes to service systems. Others require cultural shifts in both sectors. Improved communications including more opportunities for formal and informal meetings between people working in the two sectors would be likely to improve the understanding of the complementary sector's perspective and practice. Further changes would be expected to require careful work between the sectors on training, employment and practice protocols and initiatives, to allow better use of the existing services and resources.

Mental Health and Gun Control Briefing Report

The issue of gun control has once again become a highly contested issue in the United States after the most recent mass shootings at a movie theatre in Aurora, CO, a Sikh temple in Wisconsin, a mall in Portland, OR, and involving Representative Gabby Giffords in Arizona. However, it was not until the horrific tragedy in Newtown, CT, where 20 children and 6 adult staff members were fatally shot at Sandy Hook Elementary School, that the gun control debate reached its peak.

Feasibility study, use of vacant state-owned mental health and developmental disabilities facilities, December 1978 /

Cover title.

Public and private psychiatry: Can they work together and is it worth the effort?

Objective: Partnerships in mental health care, particularly between public and private psychiatric services, are being increasingly recognized as important for optimizing patient management and the efficient organization of services. However, public sector mental health services and private psychiatrists do not always work well together and there seem to be a number of barriers to effective collaboration. This study set out to investigate the extent of collaborative 'shared care' arrangements between a public mental health service and private psychiatrists practising nearby. It also examined possible barriers to collaboration and some possible solutions to the identified problems. Method: A questionnaire examining the above factors was sent to all public sector mental health clinicians and all private psychiatrists in the area. Results: One hundred and five of the 154 (68.2%) public sector clinicians and 103 of the 194 (53.1%) private psychiatrists returned surveys. The main barriers to successful collaboration identified by members of both sectors were: 'Difficulty communicating' endorsed by 71.4% of public clinicians and 72% of private psychiatrists, 'Confusion of roles and responsibilities' endorsed by 62.9% and 66%, respectively, and 'Different treatment approach' by 47.6% and 45.6%, respectively. Over 60% of private psychiatrists identified problems with access to the public system as a barrier to successful shared care arrangements. It also emerged, as hypothesized, that the public and private systems tend to manage different patient populations and that public clinicians in particular are not fully aware of the private psychiatrists' range of expertise. This would result in fewer referrals for shared care across the sectors. Conclusions: A number of barriers to public sector clinicians and private psychiatrists collaborating in shared care arrangements were identified. The two groups surveyed identified similar barriers. Some of these can potentially be addressed by changes to service systems. Others require cultural shifts in both sectors. Improved communications including more opportunities for formal and informal meetings between people working in the two sectors would be likely to improve the understanding of the complementary sector's perspective and practice. Further changes would be expected to require careful work between the sectors on training, employment and practice protocols and initiatives, to allow better use of the existing services and resources.

Multiple socioeconomic circumstances and health : associations and explanations among Finnish and British public sector employees

Socioeconomic health inequalities have been widely documented, with a lower social position being associated with poorer physical and general health and higher mortality. For mental health the results have been more varied. However, the mechanisms by which the various dimensions of socioeconomic circumstances are associated with different domains of health are not yet fully understood. This is related to a lack of studies tackling the interrelations and pathways between multiple dimensions of socioeconomic circumstances and domains of health. In particular, evidence from comparative studies of populations from different national contexts that consider the complexity of the causes of socioeconomic health inequalities is needed. The aim of this study was to examine the associations of multiple socioeconomic circumstances with physical and mental health, more specifically physical functioning and common mental disorders. This was done in a comparative setting of two cohorts of white-collar public sector employees, one from Finland and one from Britain. The study also sought to find explanations for the observed associations between economic difficulties and health by analysing the contribution of health behaviours, living arrangements and work-family conflicts. The survey data were derived from the Finnish Helsinki Health Study baseline surveys in 2000-2002 among the City of Helsinki employees aged 40-60 years, and from the fifth phase of the London-based Whitehall II study (1997-9) which is a prospective study of civil servants aged 35-55 years at the time of recruitment. The data collection in the two countries was harmonised to safeguard maximal comparability. Physical functioning was measured with the Short Form (SF-36) physical component summary and common mental disorders with the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). Socioeconomic circumstances were parental education, childhood economic difficulties, own education, occupational class, household income, housing tenure, and current economic difficulties. Further explanatory factors were health behaviours, living arrangements and work-family conflicts. The main statistical method used was logistic regression analysis. Analyses were conducted separately for the two sexes and two cohorts. Childhood and current economic difficulties were associated with poorer physical functioning and common mental disorders generally in both cohorts and sexes. Conventional dimensions of socioeconomic circumstances i.e. education, occupational class and income were associated with physical functioning and mediated each other’s effects, but in different ways in the two cohorts: education was more important in Helsinki and occupational class in London. The associations of economic difficulties with health were partly explained by work-family conflicts and other socioeconomic circumstances in both cohorts and sexes. In conclusion, this study on two country-specific cohorts confirms that different dimensions of socioeconomic circumstances are related but not interchangeable. They are also somewhat differently associated with physical and mental domains of health. In addition to conventionally measured dimensions of past and present socioeconomic circumstances, economic difficulties should be taken into account in studies and attempts to reduce health inequalities. Further explanatory factors, particularly conflicts between work and family, should also be considered when aiming to reduce inequalities and maintain the health of employees.

Negative change and job outcomes : the impact of subjective fit in public sector health care organization

There is an ongoing level of organizational-wide change (such as empowerment and downsizing) occurring within the Australian health care sector. However, there is a paucity of empirical evidence on how public and nonprofit sector nurses cope with these organizational-wide change initiatives and their consequences on individual and work outcomes. This will be the primary aim of the current paper. To this end, a path model is developed base on an integration of existing theoretical perspectives on occupational stress, change management, and person-organizational fit. Data were collected from 252 public and not-for-profit sector nurses. The path analysis suggests that public and nonprofit nurses experience positive and negative change initiatives. Negative change initiatives resulted in an increase in the level of administrative-related stressors. Nurses with more congruent values report less experience with administrative stressors. As nurses experienced more administrative stressors, they tend to report more job dissatisfaction. Nurses whose values were more congruent during organizational change reported higher level of psychological wellbeing. Nurses who were had higher level of psychological wellbeing were found to have higher job satisfaction, which subsequently led to a higher level of organizational commitment.

The public health challenges of mental health problems and associated difficulties

Mental health is a major global health issue. Neuropsychiatric conditions are the most significant cause of disability worldwide, and account for 14% of the global burden of disease. Depression in particular places a huge burden on society, with the Global Burden of Disease 2000 study listing it as the fourth leading cause of disease burden worldwide and the largest non-fatal disease burden. In Australia, mental disorders are startlingly common and related to significant disability. The 2007 National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing revealed that the lifetime prevalence of any mental disorder was 45%, and within the last 12 months 20% of Australians met criteria for a mental disorder. Many of the articles in this issue explore mental health issues in young people. Indeed, mental health issues account for a large proportion of the disease burden in young people. Across the globe, mental health disorders caused the greatest number of years lost to disability(YLDs) amongst young people aged 10 to 24 years (45% of total YLDs). Depression caused the highest number of disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) across this age group, accounting for 8. 2% of DALYs alone.6 It is clear that mental health is a critical area of focus for researchers, practitioners, and policy makers.

Implementing cognitive remediation therapy : lessons from two public mental health services

Objective: Neurocognitive deficits are a core symptom domain of schizophrenia, occurring in 75 -90 % of people with this diagnosis and influencing long term functional outcomes. This article aims to describe the pilot implementation of cognitive remediation therapy (CRT) in two large public mental health services and detail changes made to the delivery of this therapy after this trial. Conclusions: CRT provides an evidence based approach to targeting cognitive deficits but the translation of this therapy from a research setting to clinical practice has not been well evaluated.