Comparing Staff and Client Perceptions of Needs in a British Single-Sex Medium Secure Unit

The Camberwell Assessment of Need-Forensic Research Version (CANFOR–R) was used to compare perceptions of total, met, and unmet needs of patients and clinical staff. Staff reported more total and met needs. There were no statistical differences in needs of Black-Caribbean, Asian, and White patients. This study underscores the importance of communication between patients and staff to identify and address needs.

Download Full-text

A comparison of needs assessed by staff and by an epidemiologically representative sample of patients with psychosis

Psychological Medicine ◽

10.1017/s0033291798006564 ◽

1998 ◽

Vol 28 (3) ◽

pp. 543-550 ◽

Cited By ~ 103

Author(s):

M. SLADE ◽

M. PHELAN ◽

G. THORNICROFT

Keyword(s):

Representative Sample ◽

Psychotic Disorders ◽

Unmet Needs ◽

Psychiatric Service ◽

Patient Rating ◽

Severely Mentally Ill ◽

Icd 10 ◽

Camberwell Assessment Of Need ◽

Met Needs ◽

Assessment Of Need

Background. Staff and severely mentally ill patients differ in their assessments of need. This study compares staff and patient assessments of need for people suffering from psychotic disorders.Method. The needs of an epidemiologically representative sample of 137 patients from a catchment area psychiatric service in South London who had an ICD-10 diagnosis of a functional psychotic disorder were assessed cross-sectionally by patients and staff, using the Camberwell Assessment of Need.Results. Staff rated patients to have on average 6·1 needs, and patients rated 6·7 needs (t=2·58, df=136, P=0·011). This difference was accounted for by the staff rating of 1·2 unmet needs and the patient rating of 1·8 unmet needs (t=3·58, df=136, P<0·001). There was no difference in rating of total number of met needs. There was no difference in ratings in relation to any patient sociodemographic characteristics. There was moderate or better agreement on the presence of a need for 13 of the 22 domains in the Camberwell Assessment of Need.Conclusions. Staff and patients moderately agree about met needs, but agree less often on unmet needs.

Download Full-text

Reliability of the Camberwell Assessment of Need – European Version

The British Journal of Psychiatry ◽

10.1192/bjp.177.39.s34 ◽

2000 ◽

Vol 177 (S39) ◽

pp. s34-s40 ◽

Cited By ~ 86

Author(s):

Paul McCrone ◽

Morven Leese ◽

Graham Thornicroft ◽

Aart H. Schene ◽

Helle Charlotte Knudsen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Interrater Reliability ◽

Unmet Needs ◽

Psychiatric Services ◽

Standard Errors ◽

Retest Reliability ◽

Reliability Estimates ◽

Camberwell Assessment Of Need ◽

Met Needs ◽

Test Retest Reliability ◽

Assessment Of Need

BackgroundThe five-country European Psychiatric Services: Inputs Linked to Outcome Domains and Needs (EPSILON) Study aimed to develop standardised and reliable outcome instruments for people with schizophrenia. This paper reports reliability findings for the Camberwell Assessment of Need – European Version (CAN-EU).MethodThe CAN – EU was administered in each country, at two points in time to assess test – retest reliability, and was rated by two interviewers at the first administration. Cronbach's α, test–retest reliability and interrater reliability were compared between the five sites. Reliability coefficients and standard errors of measurement for summary scores were estimated.ResultsSites varied in levels and spread of needs. Alphas were 0.48, 0.58 and 0.64 for total, met and unmet needs respectively. Test–retest reliability estimates, pooled over sites, were 0.85 for the total needs, 0.69 for met needs and 0.78 for unmet needs. Pooled estimates for interrater reliability were higher, at 0.94, 0.85 and 0.79 for total, met and unmet needs respectively. There were statistically significant differences in interrater reliability between sites.ConclusionThe results confirm the feasibility of using CAN–EU across sites in Europe and its psychometric adequacy.

Download Full-text

Assessing met and unmet needs in the oldest-old and psychometric properties of the German version of the Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly (CANE) – a pilot study

International Psychogeriatrics ◽

10.1017/s1041610213001993 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 26 (2) ◽

pp. 285-295 ◽

Cited By ~ 15

Author(s):

Janine Stein ◽

Melanie Luppa ◽

Hans-Helmut König ◽

Steffi G. Riedel-Heller

Keyword(s):

Elderly Population ◽

Unmet Needs ◽

Oldest Old ◽

The Elderly ◽

German Version ◽

Healthcare Needs ◽

Study Results ◽

Health And Social Care ◽

Camberwell Assessment Of Need ◽

Assessment Of Need

ABSTRACTBackground:The current demographic and social developments in our society will lead to a significant increase in treatment and healthcare needs in the future, particularly in the elderly population. The Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly (CANE) was developed in the United Kingdom to measure physical-, psychological-, and environment-related treatment as well as healthcare needs of older people in order to identify their unmet needs. So far, the German version of the CANE has not been established in health services research. Major reasons for this are a lack of publications of CANE's German version and the missing validation of the instrument.Methods:The aims of the present study were to evaluate the currently available German version of the CANE in a sample of older primary care patients. Descriptive statistics and inference-statistical analyses were calculated.Results:Patients reported unmet needs mostly in CANE's following sections: mobility/falls, physical health, continence, company, and intimate relationships. Agreement level between patients’ and relatives’ ratings in CANE was moderate to low. Evidence for the construct validity of CANE was found in terms of significant associations between CANE and other instruments or scores.Conclusions:The study results provide an important basis for studies aiming at the assessment of met and unmet needs in the elderly population. Using the German version of the CANE may substantially contribute to an effective and good-quality health and social care as well as an appropriate allocation of healthcare resources in the elderly population.

Download Full-text

The Camberwell Assessment of Need: comparison of assessments by staff and patients in an inner-city and a semi-rural community area

Psychiatric Bulletin ◽

10.1192/pb.29.1.13 ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 29 (1) ◽

pp. 13-17 ◽

Cited By ~ 13

Author(s):

Hellme Najim ◽

Paul McCrone

Keyword(s):

Inner City ◽

Mentally Ill ◽

Unmet Needs ◽

Rural Setting ◽

Service Users ◽

City Area ◽

Severely Mentally Ill ◽

Camberwell Assessment Of Need ◽

Community Area ◽

Assessment Of Need

Aims and MethodThe aim of the study was to examine the association between the assessment of need by staff and by severely mentally ill patients using the Camberwell Assessment of Need in a semi-rural setting (Maidstone, n=50) and an inner-city area (Camberwell, n=127). Staff and patients were interviewed separately. We specifically examined differences in the total number of needs between Camberwell and Maidstone, differences in the number of unmet needs and differences in the level of agreement between staff and service users.ResultsPatients in Maidstone had fewer needs than those in Camberwell according to both staff (4.9 v. 5.8) and patients (4.2 v. 6.3), fewer unmet needs rated (staff, 1.1 v. 1.5; patients, 1.0 v. 1.9) and a greater level of concordance between staff and patients.Clinical ImplicationsThe needs of severely mentally ill patients were greater in the inner-city area compared with the semi-rural one. The fact that agreement between staff and service users was less in the inner-city area also suggests that more stable staff–patient relationships existed in the rural area.

Download Full-text