There is great cultural diversity across Europe. This is reflected in the organisation of child and adolescent mental health (CAMH) services and the training of the respective professionals in different countries in Europe. Patients and their parents will want a high quality, knowledgeable, and skillful service from child and adolescent psychiatrists (CAPs) wherever they see them in Europe. A European comparison of training programs allows all stakeholders in different European countries to assess the diversity and to initiate discussions as to the introduction of improvements within national training programs. Major issues to be addressed in comparing child and adolescent psychiatric training programs across Europe include: (1) formal organisation and content of training programs and the relationship to adult psychiatry and paediatrics; (2) flexibility of training, given different trainee interests and that many trainees will have young families; (3) quality of governance of training systems; (4) access to research; and (5) networking. The Child and Adolescent Psychiatry-Study of Training in Europe (CAP-State) is a survey of training for child and adolescent psychiatrists (CAPs) across European countries. It aims to revisit and extend the survey carried out in 2006 by Karabekiroglu and colleagues.The current article is embedded in a special issue of European Child + Adolescent Psychiatry attempting to for the first time address training in CAP at the European and global levels. Structured information was sought from each of 38 European and neighboring countries (subsequently loosely referred to as Europe) and obtained from 31. The information was provided by a senior trainee or recently qualified specialist and their information was checked and supplemented by information from a senior child and adolescent psychiatry trainer. Results showed that there is a very wide range of provision of training in child and adolescent psychiatry in different countries in Europe. There remains very substantial diversity in training across Europe and in the degree to which it is subject to national oversight and governance. Some possible reasons for this variation are discussed and some recommendations made.

Background: Multiple and complex needs (MCN) in children and youth jeopardize their development and pose significant challenges to the different professionals they meet. However, there is no agreed-upon definition of this vulnerable population. Objectives: To develop a definition of 'MCN in children and youth' that is meaningful for all professionals involved in care delivery for this population. Method: A cross-sector, multidisciplinary, and geographically spread panel of 47 experts representing mental health, youth care, juvenile justice, and education in Flanders participated in an online Delphi study. Qualitative analysis of answers in the first round yielded four definition possibilities that participants then ranked in the second round. In the last round, participants rated their agreement with the highest ranked definition. An additional survey asked 25 international experts to rate and comment their agreement with the final definition. Results: The final definition was: Children and adolescents with profound and interacting needs in the context of issues on several life domains (family context, functioning and integration in society) as well as psychiatric problems. The extent of their needs exceeds the capacity (expertise and resources) of existing services and sequential interventions lead to discontinuous care delivery. As such, existing services do not adequately meet the needs of these youths and their families. Cross-sector, integrated and assertive care delivery is necessary for safeguarding the wellbeing, development and societal integration of these young people. Response rates to the three Delphi rounds were 76.6, 89.1, and 91.3%. The definition was widely endorsed among Flemish (93.2% agreement) and international experts (88% agreement). Conclusion: A definition of MCN in children and youth was constructed using the Delphi method and further evaluated for international relevance in an additional survey. Such an agreed-upon definition can be valuable for optimizing care delivery and conducting research.

No abstract

No abstract

This study, as a part of a participatory action research project, reports the development process of an innovative collaboration between child and adolescent psychiatry and child welfare, for adolescent girls with multiple and complex needs. The findings emerge from a qualitative descriptive analysis of four focus groups with 30 professionals closely involved in this project, and describe the evolution of the collaborative efforts and outcomes through time. Participants describe large investments and negative consequences of rapid organizational change in the beginning of the collaboration project, while benefits of the intensive collaboration only appeared later. A shared person-centred vision and enhanced professionals' confidence were pointed out as important contributors in the evolution of the collaboration. Findings were compared to the literature and showed significant analogy with the life cycle model for shared service centres that describe the maturation of collaborations from a management perspective. These findings enrich the knowledge about the development process of collaboration in health and social care. In increasingly collaborative services, child and adolescent psychiatrists and policy makers should be aware that gains from a collaboration will possibly only be achieved in the longer term, and benefit from knowing which factors have an influence on the evolution of a collaboration project.

No abstract

The perspective of parents whose children are in residential care, has received only minor attention in the literature, despite evidence pointing out the value of parental involvement in care delivery for their child. Drawing upon in‐depth interviews with 12 parents of adolescent girls with multiple and complex needs in residential child welfare, this exploratory study describes parents' own needs and preferences with regard to care delivery. Parents wish: (a) to have a true partnership between parents and professionals (involvement), (b) to feel respected by professionals (respect), (c) to have the information and mandate necessary for decision‐making (agency), and (d) to receive consideration and (emotional) support, besides advice on how to handle the challenges their family faces (support). Their plea draws attention to an aspect of the dimension of “parent–caregiver partnership” in family‐centred residential care that deserves more emphasis. Indeed, being attentive to the needs of parents can contribute to the optimization of services for the most vulnerable families.

No abstract