Literature DB >> 16965478

Introduction of routine outcome measures: staff reactions and issues for consideration.

T Meehan1, S McCombes, L Hatzipetrou, R Catchpoole.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to explore clinician reactions to (i) the introduction of routine outcome measures and (ii) the utility of outcomes data in clinical practice. Focus group discussions (n = 34) were conducted with mental health staff (n = 324) at approximately 8 months post implementation of routine outcome measures. A semi-structured interview schedule was used to collect data on two key issues; reactions to the introduction of outcome measures and factors influencing the utility of outcomes data in clinical practice. Data from the discussion groups were analysed using content analysis to isolate emerging themes. While the majority of participants endorsed the collection and utilization of outcomes data, many raised questions about the merits of the initiative. Ambivalence, competing work demands, lack of support from senior medical staff, questionable evidence to support the use of outcome measures, and fear of how outcomes data might be used emerged as key issues. At 8 months post implementation a significant number of clinical staff remained ambivalent about the benefits of outcome measurement and had not engaged in the process. The shift to a service model driven by outcomes and case-mix data will take time and resources to achieve. Implications for nursing staff are discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16965478     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2850.2006.00985.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs        ISSN: 1351-0126            Impact factor:   2.952


  13 in total

1.  Monitoring Treatment Progress and Providing Feedback is Viewed Favorably but Rarely Used in Practice.

Authors:  Amanda Jensen-Doss; Emily M Becker Haimes; Ashley M Smith; Aaron R Lyon; Cara C Lewis; Cameo F Stanick; Kristin M Hawley
Journal:  Adm Policy Ment Health       Date:  2018-01

2.  A measurement feedback system (MFS) is necessary to improve mental health outcomes.

Authors:  Leonard Bickman
Journal:  J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry       Date:  2009-08-21       Impact factor: 8.829

3.  Implementation of outcome measurement (HoNOS) in an outpatient psychiatric clinic in Sligo/Leitrim mental health service.

Authors:  James Sweeney; Dimitrios Adamis; Luqman Helmi; Alastair J D Macdonald
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2019-04-12       Impact factor: 1.568

Review 4.  Perceived benefits and limitations of using patient-reported outcome measures in clinical practice with individual patients: a systematic review of qualitative studies.

Authors:  Rachel Campbell; Angela Ju; Madeleine T King; Claudia Rutherford
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2021-09-27       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  Organization-level variation in therapists' attitudes toward and use of measurement-based care.

Authors:  Nathaniel J Williams; Nallely V Ramirez; Susan Esp; April Watts; Steven C Marcus
Journal:  Adm Policy Ment Health       Date:  2022-07-18

6.  Mental health care Monitor Older adults (MEMO): monitoring patient characteristics and outcome in Dutch mental health services for older adults.

Authors:  Marjolein Veerbeek; Richard Oude Voshaar; Marja Depla; Anne Margriet Pot
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2013-05-16       Impact factor: 4.035

7.  [Psychiatry with open doors. Part 2: Therapeutic challenges].

Authors:  D Sollberger; U E Lang
Journal:  Nervenarzt       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 1.214

Review 8.  The barriers and facilitators to routine outcome measurement by allied health professionals in practice: a systematic review.

Authors:  Edward A S Duncan; Jennifer Murray
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2012-05-22       Impact factor: 2.655

9.  The effectiveness of providing peer benchmarked feedback to hip replacement surgeons based on patient-reported outcome measures--results from the PROFILE (Patient-Reported Outcomes: Feedback Interpretation and Learning Experiment) trial: a cluster randomised controlled study.

Authors:  Maria B Boyce; John P Browne
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2015-07-31       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  Surgeon's experiences of receiving peer benchmarked feedback using patient-reported outcome measures: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Maria B Boyce; John P Browne; Joanne Greenhalgh
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2014-06-27       Impact factor: 7.327

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.