P Brann1, G Coleman, E Luk. 1. Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. pbrann@silas.cc.monash.edu.au
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This paper evaluates a range of properties for a clinician-based instrument designed for routine use in a child and adolescent mental health service (CAMHS). METHOD: The Health of the Nation Outcome Scales for Children and Adolescents (HoNOSCA) is a new outcome measure with great promise. Case vignettes were used to examine interrater reliability. HoNOSCA was implemented for routine outpatient use by multidisciplinary staff with a return rate of 84%. The 305 ratings obtained at assessment were analysed by age, gender and diagnosis. A sample of 145 paired ratings with a 3-month interval were examined for the measurement of change over time. RESULTS: Interrater reliability of the total score indicates moderate reliability if absolute scores are used and good reliability if the total score is used for relative comparisons. Most scales have good to very good reliability. The scales discriminated between age and gender in the expected way. HoNOSCA correlated with clinicians' views of change and was sensitive to change over a 3-month period. The total score seemed a proxy for severity. CONCLUSION: Routine outcome instruments must be explored in settings where they will be used and with realistic training. HoNOSCA appears to be of value in routine outcome measurement and although questions remain about reliability and validity, the results strongly support further investigation.
OBJECTIVE: This paper evaluates a range of properties for a clinician-based instrument designed for routine use in a child and adolescent mental health service (CAMHS). METHOD: The Health of the Nation Outcome Scales for Children and Adolescents (HoNOSCA) is a new outcome measure with great promise. Case vignettes were used to examine interrater reliability. HoNOSCA was implemented for routine outpatient use by multidisciplinary staff with a return rate of 84%. The 305 ratings obtained at assessment were analysed by age, gender and diagnosis. A sample of 145 paired ratings with a 3-month interval were examined for the measurement of change over time. RESULTS: Interrater reliability of the total score indicates moderate reliability if absolute scores are used and good reliability if the total score is used for relative comparisons. Most scales have good to very good reliability. The scales discriminated between age and gender in the expected way. HoNOSCA correlated with clinicians' views of change and was sensitive to change over a 3-month period. The total score seemed a proxy for severity. CONCLUSION: Routine outcome instruments must be explored in settings where they will be used and with realistic training. HoNOSCA appears to be of value in routine outcome measurement and although questions remain about reliability and validity, the results strongly support further investigation.
Authors: Ketil Hanssen-Bauer; Sonja Heyerdahl; Trond Hatling; Gunnar Jensen; Pål Marius Olstad; Tormod Stangeland; Tarje Tinderholt Journal: Int J Ment Health Syst Date: 2011-01-06
Authors: Jane E Pirkis; Philip M Burgess; Pia K Kirk; Sarity Dodson; Tim J Coombs; Michelle K Williamson Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2005-11-28 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Mijnke Janssen; Michel Wensing; Rutger Jan van der Gaag; Ineke Cornelissen; Patricia van Deurzen; Jan Buitelaar Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2014-10-30 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Mark Shapiro; Susan G Silva; Scott Compton; Allan Chrisman; Joseph DeVeaugh-Geiss; Alfiee Breland-Noble; Douglas Kondo; Jerry Kirchner; John S March Journal: Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health Date: 2009-03-25 Impact factor: 3.033
Authors: Ian Sinclair; Elizabeth Parry; Nina Biehal; John Fresen; Catherine Kay; Stephen Scott; Jonathan Green Journal: Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry Date: 2015-12-10 Impact factor: 4.785