Assessing Outcomes in Psychiatric Practice: Guidelines, Challenges, and Solutions

Busch, Alisa B.; Sederer, Lloyd I.

doi:10.1080/hrp.8.6.323

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Assessing outcomes in health settings has featured in healthcare research for many decades (Jefford et al, 2003) and has become an increasing policy priority worldwide (Department of Health, 2010;Manchinkanti & Hirsh, 2009;Patterson et al, 2006) but the literature identifies many challenges in relation to how best to implement routine outcome evaluation in mental health (Busch & Sederer, 2000). This paper examines two particular areas of interest (a) in relation to whose views should take precedence and (b) in relation to the relative merits of standardized as opposed to idiographic approaches.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient-reported outcomes in child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS): Use of idiographic and standardized measures

Wolpert

Ford

Trustam³

et al. 2012

Journal of Mental Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient-reported outcomes in child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS): Use of idiographic and standardized measures

Wolpert

Ford

Trustam³

et al. 2012

Journal of Mental Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With increasing frequency, medical insurance companies and governmental agencies are mandating that mental health providers use standardized rating scales to assess patient outcomes and plan treatments as an integrative part of clinical care (Gold et al, 2009;Busch & Sederer, 2000). In the Commonwealth of Massachusetts for example, the requirement to use such ratings has become almost universal.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A review by Busch and Sederer (2000) endorsed the potential benefits of measuring outcomes in psychiatry, but stressed the importance of using procedures that are feasible, valid, and useful to clinicians. Although a recent report by the members of our team (Gold et al, 2009) demonstrated the overall feasibility and validity of using two different clinician-completed rating scales in a large diverse child psychiatry system of care, the usefulness of the program to clinicians was uncertain and several other major problems were noted.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring outcomes in outpatient child psychiatry: The contribution of electronic technologies and parent report

Murphy

Masek

Babcock

et al. 2010

Clin Child Psychol Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of electronic technologies on the completion of a standardized rating form in an outpatient child psychiatry clinic, and the feasibility of adding a parent-report measure to the form. An electronic Outcomes Rating Form (e-ORF) was used in conjunction with a web-based patient tracking system and digital pens which allowed form data to be directly entered into a database. Clinician forms were collected for 87% of the 248 children seen for intake, a significant increase over the rate of 72% obtained in the same clinic with paper forms. Rating forms were also obtained from 85% of parents. Clinician- and parent-completed measures were moderately correlated with each other. This study showed that 1) the use of electronic technologies is associated with improved clinician completion rates; 2) it is possible to obtain rating forms from most parents; 3) clinician and parent measures provide related but distinct information; and 4) improvements in functioning found with clinician-report measures are corroborated by independent parent reports.

show abstract

“…In practice, however, many of the measures used in psychiatric rehabilitation settings are ad hoc, developed by a specific agency for its own use. These ad hoc measures usually lack sufficient psychometric precision and thus preclude comparability among services (Busch & Sederer, 2000). The use of ad hoc measures is partly attributable to the perceived feasibility (i.e., ease of use) of these measures.…”

Section: Selection Of Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating outcomes of rehabilitation for severe mental illness.

Iyer¹,

Rothmann²,

Vogler³

et al. 2005

Rehabilitation Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Improving the quality of life of individuals with severe mental illness has been the focus of considerable research. With advances in treatments for severe mental illness, particularly in psychiatric rehabilitation, evaluating outcomes has become increasingly important. Given the complex and multidimensional nature of severe mental illness, outcome evaluation of psychiatric rehabilitation is particularly difficult. This article addresses issues in evaluating psychiatric rehabilitation outcomes, including key outcome domains, selection of methods and measures, and meaningful use of results. Continuing conceptual and methodological issues are discussed. Also, future directions are explored, including evaluating multidimensional treatment effects and interactions and building an integrated understanding of all of the outcomes involved in psychiatric rehabilitation. 1 The term psychiatric rehabilitation may be confused with psychosocial rehabilitation, and the two are sometimes used interchangeably. In practice, both are sometimes used as a contraction of biopsychosocial rehabilitation. However, psychosocial rehabilitation sometimes specifically refers to a particular type of program, associated with specific prototypes, such as Fountain House in New York and Thresholds in Chicago (McEvoy, Scheifler, & Frances, 1999).

show abstract

Assessing Outcomes in Psychiatric Practice: Guidelines, Challenges, and Solutions

Cited by 4 publications

References 15 publications

Patient-reported outcomes in child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS): Use of idiographic and standardized measures

Patient-reported outcomes in child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS): Use of idiographic and standardized measures

Measuring outcomes in outpatient child psychiatry: The contribution of electronic technologies and parent report

Evaluating outcomes of rehabilitation for severe mental illness.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About