scholarly journals Intelligent outcome measures in liaison psychiatry: essential even if not desirable

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (4) ◽  
pp. 195-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Tadros
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Service Development ◽  
Liaison Psychiatry ◽  
Everyday Clinical Practice ◽  
Positive Approach ◽  
Routine Outcome Measurement ◽  
Significant Step ◽  
Training Activities

SummaryService development is guided by outcome measures that inform service commissioners and providers. Those in liaison psychiatry should be encouraged to develop a positive approach that integrates the collection of outcome measures into everyday clinical practice. The Framework for Routine Outcome Measurement in Liaison Psychiatry (FROM-LP) is a very useful tool to measure service quality and clinical effectiveness, using a combination of clinician-rated and patient-rated outcome measures and patient-rated experience measures. However, it does not include measures of cost-effectiveness or training activities. The FROM-LP is a significant step towards developing nationally unified outcome measures.

scholarly journals Service user and clinician perspectives on the use of outcome measures in psychological therapy

2015 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graham R. Thew ◽  
Louise Fountain ◽  
Paul M. Salkovskis
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Service User ◽  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Psychological Therapy ◽  
Service Development ◽  
Service Users ◽  
Routine Outcome Measurement ◽  
Episode Of Care ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Clinician Perspectives

AbstractWhile the benefits of routine outcome measurement have been extolled and to some degree researched, it is surprising that service user opinions on this common therapy practice have largely not been investigated. This study aimed to assess service users’ experiences of completing measures during psychological therapy, with a view to exploring how therapists can maximize how helpful measures are in therapy. Fifteen participants completed surveys about the use of measures in their current episode of care. Ten clinicians also completed a survey about their use of, and views about, measures. Results showed that despite mixed experiences in how measures were explained and used, service users showed generally favourable attitudes towards their use in therapy, with them being perceived as most helpful when well integrated into sessions by their therapists. Clinicians reported using a wide range of measures, and generally endorsed positive beliefs about measures more strongly than negative ones. Implications for clinical practice, service development, and further research are discussed.

scholarly journals Liaison psychiatry for older adults in the general hospital: service activity, development and outcomes

2018 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fedza Mujic ◽  
Ruth Cairns ◽  
Vivienne Mak ◽  
Clare Squire ◽  
Andrew Wells ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
General Hospital ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Clinical Implications ◽  
Liaison Psychiatry ◽  
Case Load ◽  
Service Activity ◽  
Training Activities ◽  
Load Characteristics ◽  
And Training

Aims and methodThis study used data collected to describe the activity, case-load characteristics and outcome measures for all patients seen during a 6-year period.ResultsThe service reviewed 2153 patients over 6 years with referral rates and case-load characteristics comparable to those described in a previous study period. The team saw 82% of patients on the day they were referred. Data and outcome measures collected showed significant complexity in the cases seen and statistically significant improvement in Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) scores following service input.Clinical implicationsThe outcome measures used were limited, but the study supports the need for specialist liaison psychiatry for older adults (LPOA) services in the general hospital. The Framework of Outcome Measures – Liaison Psychiatry has now been introduced, but it remains unclear how valid this is in LPOA. It is of note that cost-effectiveness secondary to service input and training activities are not adequately monitored.Declaration of interestNone.

scholarly journals The clinical utility of the IRAC component of the Framework for Routine Outcome Measurement in Liaison Psychiatry (FROM-LP)

2018 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 152-156
Author(s):  
Caroline Guest ◽  
Stephen Crockett ◽  
Patrick Little ◽  
Anish Patel
Keyword(s):  
National Health Service ◽  
Health Service ◽  
Retrospective Analysis ◽  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Clinical Implications ◽  
Referral Process ◽  
Liaison Psychiatry ◽  
Routine Outcome Measurement ◽  
Before And After

Aims and methodThe clinical utility of the multidimensional Framework for Routine Outcome Measurement in Liaison Psychiatry (FROM-LP) has not previously been examined. We sought to establish whether referral accuracy and ability to achieve the reason(s) for referral to our liaison service improved after incorporating the Identify and Rate the Aim of the Contact (IRAC) scale of this tool into our referral process. We carried out a retrospective analysis of electronic case notes of all appropriate referrals to the team before and after this adaption.ResultsAccuracy of referrals to our team improved from 73.8 to 93.7% following intervention. Referral requests that were fully achieved improved from 57.4 to 77.8%, and referral requests that were not achieved decreased from 26.2 to 6.4%.Clinical implicationsThe IRAC component of the FROM-LP measures what it was developed for, and thus has clinical utility supporting its widespread adoption across liaison services in the National Health Service.Declaration of interestNone.

scholarly journals A multidimensional Framework for Routine Outcome Measurement in Liaison Psychiatry (FROM-LP)

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (4) ◽  
pp. 192-194 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Trigwell ◽  
James Kustow
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Liaison Psychiatry ◽  
Direct Relevance ◽  
Routine Outcome Measurement

SummaryIn the field of liaison psychiatry, as in all areas of healthcare, there is an essential need for well-organised and consistent collection of information on outcomes, from a range of perspectives. This special article introduces, and describes the development of, the multidimensional Framework for Routine Outcome Measurement in Liaison Psychiatry (FROM-LP). This was challenging owing to the variety of service settings and types of intervention which characterise liaison psychiatry. Similar challenges may be faced by other specialties and this, along with the direct relevance of much of the eventual content of the framework, will broaden the interest of this article.

scholarly journals Routine outcome measurement in public mental health: results of a clinician survey

2006 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom Callaly ◽  
Mary Hyland ◽  
Tim Coombs ◽  
Tom Trauer
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Outcome Measure ◽  
Health Workers ◽  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Public Mental Health ◽  
Mental Health Workers ◽  
Clinical Value ◽  
Routine Outcome Measurement

This paper explores the attitudes of mental health workers in one public mental health service towards the implementation and use of routine outcome measurement. Two years after their introduction into routine clinical practice, there were equal numbers of positive and negative observations from clinicians about the clinical value of the clinician-rated outcome measures, while more positive observations were made about value of the consumer-rated outcome measure. The most frequent observation from clinicians in relation to making outcome measures more useful to them in clinical practice was that more training, particularly refresher training, is needed. In addition, clinicians indicated that more sophisticated support which assists them to understand the meaning and possible use of outcome measure ratings is required.

scholarly journals Routine outcome measurement: recovery, quality of life and co-production

2018 ◽  
Vol 212 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jed Boardman
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Service User ◽  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Routine Outcome Measurement ◽  
Patient’S Perspective ◽  
Patient Reported

SummaryPatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are self-rated, but may not take in other aspects of the patient's perspective, such as the inclusion of domains that reflect service-user priorities. The clinician's view still has priority, although this situation has shifted in recent years. The Recovering Quality of Life (ReQoL) offers an advance in this area.Declaration of interestNone.

Routine Outcome Measurement binnen PsyQ: normering van de 4 K’s

2009 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 243-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
I P A M Huijbrechts ◽  
M Appelo ◽  
C W Korrelboom ◽  
Colin van der Heiden ◽  
E H Bos
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Routine Outcome Measurement

Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Venous Ulceration

2001 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Howard ◽  
A. H. Davies
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Venous Ulcer ◽  
Health Related Quality ◽  
Venous Ulceration ◽  
Complete Treatment ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Health Related

Aim: To review the role of Health Related Quality of Life (HRQL) assessments in the management of patients with venous ulceration. Method: A search of electronic databases and reference lists delivered numerous articles containing a variety of HRQL assessments for venous ulcer treatment. Synthesis: The salient points from the literature were collaborated in order to establish which outcome measures best reflect the quality of care delivered. The treatment of chronic venous leg ulceration is often prolonged and a permanent cure is frequently unattainable. An improvement in a patient's condition needs to be demonstrated in order to determine the benefit of a surgical treatment. The assessment of HRQL is increasingly recognised as a valuable surgical outcome measurement. Conclusion: The combination of ‘standard’ clinical outcome measures, the generic SF-36 and a specific ‘venous ulcer’ HRQL questionnaire can produce a more complete treatment outcome assessment in patients with venous ulceration.

scholarly journals Generic Patient-Reported Outcomes and Outcome Measures: A Systematic Review Study Protocol

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuki Seidler ◽  
Erika Mosor ◽  
Margaret R Andrews ◽  
Carolina Watson ◽  
Nick Bott ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Screening Process ◽  
Patient Reported

Background: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are an essential part of health outcome measurement and vital to patient-centricity and valued-based care. Several international consortia have developed core outcome sets and many of them include PROs. PROs are measured by patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). PROs and PROMs can be generic or specific to certain diseases or conditions. While the characteristics of generic PROs and PROMs are well recognised as widely relevant and applicable across different domains, diseases and conditions, there is a lack of knowledge on the types of PROs measured by generic PROMs. We also do not know in which disease areas generic PROs and PROMs are commonly used. To date, there has been no systematic review solely focusing on generic PROMs, what they measure and their areas of application. Objectives: This systematic review will identify core PROs measured by generic PROMs used in adult populations and the areas in which they are applied. Methods: We will conduct a systematic review of reviews. The screening process and the reporting will comply with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) 2020 Statement. We will use four databases, Medline [PubMed], CINHAL [Ebsco], Cochrane [Cochrane Library], and PsycINFO [Ovid], and reports from international consortia. Inclusion criteria are systematic reviews, meta-analysis or patient-reported outcome sets developed by international consortia reporting on generic PROMs in adult populations. Articles primarily focusing on patient-reported experience measures (PREMs), children or adolescents, or those not written in English will be excluded. Risk of bias will be assessed by checking if the included articles comply with established guidelines for systematic reviews such as the PRISMA statement. We will extract generic PROMs and PROs measured by these PROMs, and the areas applied from the selected articles and reports. Extracted data and information will be quantitatively and qualitatively synthesised without statistical interference. The quality of the synthesised evidences will be assessed by clarifying the strengths, limitations and possible biases in our review.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document