Step4心理治疗服务评估过程的服务评估

IF 1 Q4 PSYCHIATRY
Amie L. Robinson, Danielle De Boos, Nima G. Moghaddam
{"title":"Step4心理治疗服务评估过程的服务评估","authors":"Amie L. Robinson, Danielle De Boos, Nima G. Moghaddam","doi":"10.1108/mhrj-07-2022-0047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis study aims to improve the efficiency of the assessment process within a Step4 Psychological Therapies Service by identifying factors related to assessment non-attendance and service suitability for referred clients.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nReferral and assessment information was accessed between October 2019 and March 2020 from Step4 routine service data, electronic client records where necessary and Step4 staff self-report questionnaires.\n\n\nFindings\nAll clients offered an assessment during this time attended. Findings indicated several factors could influence service suitability in meeting client need. These included individual differences such as readiness to change, which was not necessarily identified at referral or prior to assessment, and potential systemic factors, such as the opt-in procedure, which possibly impeded access. Though the necessity for assessment in clarifying client needs and treatment was indicated, an assessment (from referral to assessment appointment) that led to discharge could take an excess of one working day of service time, associated with considerable opportunity cost to other clients awaiting assessment. Recommendations are made for improving assessment efficiency.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nWith a high prevalence of poor mental health in the UK, efforts must be made to identify and reduce additional demand upon service time and resources within mental health services to effectively meet people’s needs. Recommendations to improve assessment process efficiency include the use of a standardised referral form, offer of follow-up support procedures, increased client involvement, a streamlined opt-in battery and ongoing monitoring to ensure shared practice between clinicians. These are transferable to other mental health services, with implications for subsequent quality and timeliness of care.\n","PeriodicalId":45687,"journal":{"name":"Mental Health Review Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A service evaluation of the assessment process in a Step4 Psychological Therapies Service\",\"authors\":\"Amie L. Robinson, Danielle De Boos, Nima G. Moghaddam\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/mhrj-07-2022-0047\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThis study aims to improve the efficiency of the assessment process within a Step4 Psychological Therapies Service by identifying factors related to assessment non-attendance and service suitability for referred clients.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nReferral and assessment information was accessed between October 2019 and March 2020 from Step4 routine service data, electronic client records where necessary and Step4 staff self-report questionnaires.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nAll clients offered an assessment during this time attended. Findings indicated several factors could influence service suitability in meeting client need. These included individual differences such as readiness to change, which was not necessarily identified at referral or prior to assessment, and potential systemic factors, such as the opt-in procedure, which possibly impeded access. Though the necessity for assessment in clarifying client needs and treatment was indicated, an assessment (from referral to assessment appointment) that led to discharge could take an excess of one working day of service time, associated with considerable opportunity cost to other clients awaiting assessment. Recommendations are made for improving assessment efficiency.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nWith a high prevalence of poor mental health in the UK, efforts must be made to identify and reduce additional demand upon service time and resources within mental health services to effectively meet people’s needs. Recommendations to improve assessment process efficiency include the use of a standardised referral form, offer of follow-up support procedures, increased client involvement, a streamlined opt-in battery and ongoing monitoring to ensure shared practice between clinicians. These are transferable to other mental health services, with implications for subsequent quality and timeliness of care.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":45687,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Mental Health Review Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Mental Health Review Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/mhrj-07-2022-0047\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mental Health Review Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/mhrj-07-2022-0047","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的本研究旨在通过确定与评估不出勤和转诊客户服务适合性相关的因素,提高Step4心理治疗服务中评估过程的效率。设计/方法/方法在2019年10月至2020年3月期间,从Step4常规服务数据、必要时的电子客户记录和Step4员工自我报告问卷中获取了转介和评估信息。Findings在此期间,所有客户都进行了评估。调查结果表明,在满足客户需求方面,有几个因素会影响服务的适用性。其中包括个人差异,如在转诊时或评估前不一定确定的改变意愿,以及可能阻碍访问的潜在系统性因素,如选择加入程序。尽管有人指出,评估有必要澄清客户的需求和治疗,但导致出院的评估(从转诊到评估预约)可能需要超过一个工作日的服务时间,这给等待评估的其他客户带来了可观的机会成本。提出了提高评估效率的建议。独创性/价值随着英国精神健康状况不佳的普遍性,必须努力确定并减少对精神健康服务时间和资源的额外需求,以有效满足人们的需求。提高评估过程效率的建议包括使用标准化的转诊表、提供后续支持程序、增加客户参与、简化选择加入小组和持续监测,以确保临床医生之间共享实践。这些可以转移到其他心理健康服务中,从而影响后续护理的质量和及时性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A service evaluation of the assessment process in a Step4 Psychological Therapies Service
Purpose This study aims to improve the efficiency of the assessment process within a Step4 Psychological Therapies Service by identifying factors related to assessment non-attendance and service suitability for referred clients. Design/methodology/approach Referral and assessment information was accessed between October 2019 and March 2020 from Step4 routine service data, electronic client records where necessary and Step4 staff self-report questionnaires. Findings All clients offered an assessment during this time attended. Findings indicated several factors could influence service suitability in meeting client need. These included individual differences such as readiness to change, which was not necessarily identified at referral or prior to assessment, and potential systemic factors, such as the opt-in procedure, which possibly impeded access. Though the necessity for assessment in clarifying client needs and treatment was indicated, an assessment (from referral to assessment appointment) that led to discharge could take an excess of one working day of service time, associated with considerable opportunity cost to other clients awaiting assessment. Recommendations are made for improving assessment efficiency. Originality/value With a high prevalence of poor mental health in the UK, efforts must be made to identify and reduce additional demand upon service time and resources within mental health services to effectively meet people’s needs. Recommendations to improve assessment process efficiency include the use of a standardised referral form, offer of follow-up support procedures, increased client involvement, a streamlined opt-in battery and ongoing monitoring to ensure shared practice between clinicians. These are transferable to other mental health services, with implications for subsequent quality and timeliness of care.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
32
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信