scholarly journals 34 Improving physical healthcare for inpatients on a psychiatric unit

Author(s):  
Emma Watura ◽  
David Denton
Keyword(s):  
1968 ◽  
Vol 114 (516) ◽  
pp. 1441-1454 ◽  

In 1965 the Education Committee drew up a questionnaire on postgraduate teaching (prepared in a form suitable for I.B.M. punching) which was then circulated to every psychiatric hospital, psychiatric unit and teaching hospital in the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland, and to those hospitals abroad recognized by the Conjoint Board as providing training for the D.P.M. The questionnaires were sent out late in 1965, and after two sets of reminders the returned results were processed by the Tabulating Research Centre at Hampstead. Regrettably, the Centre, although providing a great deal of information very quickly, delayed for almost a year completing the processing of the data.


2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. S706-S707
Author(s):  
B.S. Voigtländer ◽  
T. Barth

IntroductionIn Germany a consistent, performance-oriented, flat-rate remuneration system based on per-day payments for inpatient and day patient hospital services for psychiatric and psychosomatic facilities (PEPP) is developed. The Klinikum Chemnitz gGmbH decided in 2013 to participate in the optional PEPP introducing phase and acts as a PEPP cost accounting hospital.ObjectivesDue to a controversial discussion by the psychiatric experts, an adjustment of the hitherto only performance-based to a budget-oriented system based on PEPP is planned in 2017.AimsThis paper discusses if the current PEPP remuneration system enables an appropriate recognition and measurement of services.MethodsDescriptive analyses were performed by comparing inpatient and day patient treatment at a therapy oriented psychiatric unit and the emergency psychiatric unit in 2015. The evaluation primarily focused on the criteria of “staffing level and structure”, “imaging of services by German procedure classification (OPS) according to PEPP”, “PEPP remuneration”.ResultsOur findings (Table 1) show that in 2015 the PEPP remuneration system provided an appropriate recognition of unit-specific services in emergency psychiatry (e.g., 1 to 1 care, intensive care treatment), but services of board certified therapeutic staff were recognized inadequately in consequence of the definition of therapy by the OPS catalogue.ConclusionFurther development of payment system should implicate changes in the definition of therapy according to scientific guidelines and the pay for performance concept.Table 1Disclosure of interestActivity as a speaker, Janssen-Cilag GmbH.


2021 ◽  
pp. 026377582110130
Author(s):  
Laura McGrath ◽  
Steven D Brown ◽  
Ava Kanyeredzi ◽  
Paula Reavey ◽  
Ian Tucker

Sitting between the psychiatric and criminal justice systems, and yet fully located in neither, forensic psychiatric units are complex spaces. Both a therapeutic landscape and a carceral space, forensic services must try to balance the demands of therapy and security, or recovery and risk, within the confines of a strictly controlled institutional space. This article draws on qualitative material collected in a large forensic psychiatric unit in the UK, comprising 20 staff interviews and 20 photo production interviews with patients. We use John Law’s ‘modes of ordering’ to explore how the materials, relations and spaces are mobilised in everyday processes of living and working on the unit. We identify two ‘modes of ordering’: ‘keeping safe’, which we argue tends towards empty, stultified and static spaces; and ‘keep progressing’ which instead requires filling, enriching and ingraining spaces. We discuss ways in which tensions between these modes of ordering are resolved in the unit, noting a spatial hierarchy which prioritises ‘keeping safe’, thus limiting the institutional capacity for engendering progress and change. The empirical material is discussed in relation to the institutional and carceral geography literatures with a particular focus on mobilities.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document