PP447 Informing The Development And Evaluation Of An Evidence-Based Service Delivery Model For Mental Health Patients With Complex Needs

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (S1) ◽  
pp. 37-38
Author(s):  
Pooja Saini ◽  
Antony Martin ◽  
Jason C. McIntyre ◽  
Laura Sambrook ◽  
Hana Roks ◽  
...  

IntroductionMental health services for adults have been developed to provide community-based interventions. There is a recognized unmet need in some of the most complex patients that may not be adequately met by existing mental health services provision. Research is warranted to consider the best model of service delivery for this group of service users. The aims of this research were to examine the profile and history of service users defined as having complex needs as well as their service use and associated costs in the Cheshire and Wirral Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (CWP).MethodsA diverse group of stakeholders were invited to provide feedback on the content and design of the proforma for data collection from the medical records of service users. The rationale of the data collection was described to ensure relevant patient-level cost information was collected to identify and quantify the relevant resources consumed, to inform the evaluation of direct medical costs, direct non-medical costs, and indirect costs for each patient. The proforma was designed to also permit comparisons of clinical and service use outcomes for evaluation of patient health and non-health outcomes associated with alternative care pathways.ResultsStakeholder feedback comprised representatives from the CWP, patients, commissioners, the Local Authority, and housing. Relevant data for extraction from patient medical records were identified and a proforma was developed. The following items were identified for inclusion: baseline demographic data, service user data (family background, contact with the criminal justice system, social history), and clinical data (diagnosis, treatment, hospital visits, and other health service use).ConclusionsA proforma was developed with diverse stakeholder involvement to inform data collection on the resource use and cost impact associated with alternative care pathways in the National Health Service and other sectors of the economy. Based on the proforma developed and data extracted, an exploration of patient health and non-health outcomes associated with alternative care pathways will be conducted to inform service evaluation and to promote patient centric care.

BJPsych Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (S1) ◽  
pp. S286-S286
Author(s):  
Pooja Saini ◽  
Rajan Nathan ◽  
Laura Sambrook ◽  
Sam Burton ◽  
Hana Roks ◽  
...  

AimsCo-production recognises that people who use social care services (and their families) and third sector organisations within community settings have knowledge and experience that can be used to help make services better for services users and those who care for them. This study shares the coproduction that took place in the design of a mixed methods study that aims to understand: the profile and history of service users currently defined as having complex needs; the decision-making processes by clinicians that lead to these individuals entering this complex group; service users and carers experience of service use; and, the associated costs. This study involves a comprehensive evaluation that aims to inform an evidence-based service delivery model for mental health service users with complex needs.MethodA study stakeholder group, including clinicians, academics, service users, housing associations, health economists, and statisticians was formed from the outset to inform the mixed methods design, combining quantitative (in-depth analysis of patient records and economic evaluation) and qualitative (written medical notes and in-depth interviews with service users, carers, and clinicians) methods. The study included five components: (1) a quantitative description and analysis of the demographic clinical characteristics of the patient group; (2) an economic evaluation of direct medical costs, direct non-medical costs, and indirect costs for each patient; (3) semi-structured interviews about patients and carers experiences; (4) data from components 1-3 was used to co-produce vignettes jointly with the stakeholders group; and, (5) semi-structured interviews about clinical decision-making by clinicians in relation to this patient group by using the vignettes as example case studies.ResultCoproduction took place at each stage of the study, including the design, development of data collection tools, data analysis and formation of the vignettes required for stage five. The results demonstrated how co-production and multiagency working have been evident throughout the process of designing the study, the continuous engagement throughout the analysis, dissemination and implementation of the findings.ConclusionThe findings support the application of the core principles of co-production in the design, set-up and implementation of research within an NHS Trust as demonstrable by the acceptability and collaborative working within the study. The study's key outcomes were to: examine the resource use and cost impact associated with alternative care pathways to the NHS and other sectors of the economy (including social care); explore patient health and non-health outcomes associated with alternative care pathways; and, gain an understanding of a complex service user group and how decisions are made in their treatment to inform how services are delivered in the future and made more person-centred and consistent.


10.2196/15540 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. e15540
Author(s):  
Jacqui McCoy ◽  
Suzanne Nielsen ◽  
Raimondo Bruno

Background On February 1, 2018, Australia rescheduled codeine to a prescription-only medication. Many concerns were associated with this change, including increased financial costs, reduced service accessibility, the potential for poorer pain management, and a decline in physical and mental health if codeine could not be accessed. In the research literature, there is limited knowledge about the long-term consequences of rescheduling pharmaceutical opioids and, as Australia has followed many countries in implementing a restriction on codeine, further study of these consequences is critical. Objective The goal of this study was to examine the impact of rescheduling codeine from an over-the-counter (OTC) product to a prescription-only medicine on the primary measures of codeine use and dependence in a prospective cohort of people who are frequent consumers of OTC codeine. Secondary measures included pain and self-efficacy, health service use, and mental health. Methods The Codeine Cohort study aimed to recruit 300 participants in Australia who regularly (at least a few times per week for the past 6 months) used OTC codeine. Using an online survey, participants were followed up at three time points (February 2018, June 2018, and February 2019) after codeine was rescheduled. Results All four waves of data collection are complete, with the final round of data collection finalized in August 2019. Data analyses are yet to be completed. Information on demographics, codeine use and dependence, physical and mental health, medication use, and health service use will be analyzed using mixed models. Conclusions Results of this study will provide insight into the effectiveness of regulatory restriction in curtailing nonmedical use of and harms associated with codeine. Additionally, results will explore positive and negative outcomes of codeine rescheduling for individual patients, which informs health professionals who support patients who use codeine and further community education. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) DERR1-10.2196/15540


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacqui McCoy ◽  
Suzanne Nielsen ◽  
Raimondo Bruno

BACKGROUND On February 1, 2018, Australia rescheduled codeine to a prescription-only medication. Many concerns were associated with this change, including increased financial costs, reduced service accessibility, the potential for poorer pain management, and a decline in physical and mental health if codeine could not be accessed. In the research literature, there is limited knowledge about the long-term consequences of rescheduling pharmaceutical opioids and, as Australia has followed many countries in implementing a restriction on codeine, further study of these consequences is critical. OBJECTIVE The goal of this study was to examine the impact of rescheduling codeine from an over-the-counter (OTC) product to a prescription-only medicine on the primary measures of codeine use and dependence in a prospective cohort of people who are frequent consumers of OTC codeine. Secondary measures included pain and self-efficacy, health service use, and mental health. METHODS The Codeine Cohort study aimed to recruit 300 participants in Australia who regularly (at least a few times per week for the past 6 months) used OTC codeine. Using an online survey, participants were followed up at three time points (February 2018, June 2018, and February 2019) after codeine was rescheduled. RESULTS All four waves of data collection are complete, with the final round of data collection finalized in August 2019. Data analyses are yet to be completed. Information on demographics, codeine use and dependence, physical and mental health, medication use, and health service use will be analyzed using mixed models. CONCLUSIONS Results of this study will provide insight into the effectiveness of regulatory restriction in curtailing nonmedical use of and harms associated with codeine. Additionally, results will explore positive and negative outcomes of codeine rescheduling for individual patients, which informs health professionals who support patients who use codeine and further community education. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT DERR1-10.2196/15540


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pooja Saini ◽  
Antony Martin ◽  
Jason McIntyre ◽  
Anna Balmer ◽  
Sam Burton ◽  
...  

Background Mental health services for adults, as they are currently configured, have been designed to provide predominantly community-based interventions. It has long been recognised that some patients have such significant clinical and/or risk needs that those needs cannot be adequately met within standard service delivery models, resulting in a pressing need to consider the best models for this group of people. This paper shares a protocol for a mixed methods study that aims to understand: the profile and history of service users described as having complex needs; the decision-making processes by clinicians that lead to complex needs categorisation; service users and carers experience of service use; and, associated economic impact. This protocol describes a comprehensive evaluation that aims to inform an evidence-based service delivery model for people with complex needs. Methods We will use a mixed methods design, combining quantitative and qualitative methods using in-depth descriptive and inferential analysis of patient records, written medical notes and in-depth interviews with service users, carers, and clinicians. The study will include five components: (1) a quantitative description and analysis of the demographic clinical characteristics of the patient group; (2) an economic evaluation of alternative patient pathways; (3) semi-structured interviews about service user and carer experiences; (4) using data from components 1-3 to co-produce vignettes jointly with relevant stakeholders involved in the care of service users with complex mental health needs; and, (5) semi-structured interviews about clinical decision-making by clinicians in relation to this patient group, using the vignettes as example case studies. Discussion The studys key outcomes will be to: examine the resource use and cost-impact associated with alternative care pathways to the NHS and other sectors of the economy (including social care); explore patient health and non-health outcomes associated with alternative care pathways; and, gain an understanding of a complex service user group and how treatment decisions are made to inform consistent and person-centred future service delivery.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 98-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina B. Gee ◽  
Gagan S. Khera ◽  
Alyssa T. Poblete ◽  
Barunie Kim ◽  
Syeda Y. Buchwach

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pablo Garcia-Cubillana de la Cruz ◽  
Aguila bono del Trigo ◽  
Vicente Ibanez Rojo ◽  
Evelyn Huizing

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document