SEQUenCE: a service user-centred quality of care instrument for mental health services

Hester, Lorraine; O’Doherty, Lorna; Schnittger, Rebecca; Skelly, Niamh; O’Donnell, Muireann; Butterly, Lisa; Browne, Robert; Frorath, Charlotte; Morgan, Craig; McLoughlin, Declan M.; Fearon, Paul

doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzv043

Cited by 8 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results of one study (Killaspy et al., ) were excellent regarding the quality of the methodology used. Conversely, in three studies (1 on quality and 2 on satisfaction) (Danielson et al., ; Hansson & Höglund, ; Ivarsson & Malm, ) the score was fair, while for two of the 34 studies analysed (Awara & Fasey, ; Hester et al., ) the score was poor in relation to the quality of the methodology due to the percentage of missing items and a lack of explanation on how these items were managed.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Of the 22 instruments analysed, 12 measured the quality of care and 10 satisfaction, with three measuring overall satisfaction as the endpoint of the intervention (Barker & Orrell, ; Jerrell, ; Ruggeri et al., ). With regard to instruments measuring quality, those considering the perspectives of patients and professionals were of note (Danielson et al., ; Hester et al., ; Killaspy et al., ; Lundqvist, Raskl, Brunt, Ivarsson, & Schröder, ; Madan et al., ; Schröder, Ågrim, & Lundqvist, ; Schröder, Ahlström, Wilde‐Larsson, & Lundqvist, ; Schröder, Larsson, & Ahlström, ; Schröder, Larsson, Ahlstrom, & Lundqvist, ; Schröder & Lundqvist, ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Psychometric properties of instruments measuring quality and satisfaction in mental health: A systematic review

Sánchez‐Balcells

Roca

Rodriguez-Zunino

et al. 2018

Journal of Advanced Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychometric properties of instruments measuring quality and satisfaction in mental health: A systematic review

Sánchez‐Balcells

Roca

Rodriguez-Zunino

et al. 2018

Journal of Advanced Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…), and the development and assessment of ‘experience of care’ tools would undoubtedly benefit from being grounded in the experiences of those who have experienced the care (Hester et al . ). However, more importantly, this would embody the principle of collaboration on which the process is based and acknowledge that a loss of reciprocity of processes (such as providing ‘experiences of care’ with no follow‐up or response) and disempowerment within participation (such as service providers gathering data from service users) can replicate wider social stigmatization of mental health service users (Hutchinson & Lovell ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

‘In some ways it all helps but in some ways it doesn't’: The complexities of service users’ experiences of inpatient mental health care in Australia

Isobel

2018

Int J Mental Health Nurs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recovery-oriented mental health care requires active involvement of service users in the evaluation of care. While experience of care surveys is routinely given out upon discharge, capturing the depth and detail of service users' experiences in such a way to meaningfully improve services may require more in-depth and targeted approaches. This study aimed to gather voluntary and involuntary service users' experiences of care during hospitalization in two acute adult mental health inpatient units, through the collaborative completion of a purpose designed tool. The purpose of the study was to examine broad experiences of care and to identify the utility of proactive approaches to ongoing service evaluation. Overall, 67 participants were interviewed. Findings highlight the complexity of experiences of care including how an admission can seemingly facilitate clinical recovery while not being recovery-oriented. The findings also detail areas for improvement in the way that care is delivered and evaluated. The implications are particularly pertinent for mental health nurses to consider how, within the existing constraints of their roles, they can provide therapeutic care to all service users.

show abstract

“…For example, the amalgam term 'user/carer' appears in a recent in-depth review of 'user-led care planning', 110 whereas 'family/carer' is a term used elsewhere with no definitions offered of what constituted a carer. 138 The use of undefined amalgam phrases could be misleading, as they conflate social groups with potentially different viewpoints and interests. For example, relatives of patients may not feel comfortable with the ascribed role of carer, preferring instead to preserve their identity as a partner, husband, wife or daughter.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…112,136 Similarly, the importance of staff-patient relationships based on collaborative care was central to patients' perceptions of good-quality inpatient mental health. 126,131,137,138 …”

Section: Patient Perceptions Of Care Quality and Satisfactionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-national mixed-methods comparative case study of recovery-focused mental health care planning and co-ordination in acute inpatient mental health settings (COCAPP-A)

Simpson

Coffey

Hannigan

et al. 2017

Health Serv Deliv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundMental health service users in acute inpatient wards, whether informal or detained, should be involved in planning and reviewing their care. Care planning processes should be personalised and focused on recovery, with goals that are specific to the individual and designed to maximise their achievements and social integration.Objective(s)We aimed to ascertain the views and experiences of service users, carers and staff to enable us to identify factors that facilitated or acted as barriers to collaborative, recovery-focused care and to make suggestions for future research.DesignA cross-national comparative mixed-methods study involving 19 mental health wards in six NHS sites in England and Wales included a metanarrative synthesis of policies and literature; a survey of service users (n = 301) and staff (n = 290); embedded case studies involving interviews with staff, service users and carers (n = 76); and a review of care plans (n = 51) and meetings (n = 12).ResultsNo global differences were found across the sites in the scores of the four questionnaires completed by service users. For staff, there was significant difference between sites in mean scores on recovery-orientation and therapeutic relationships. For service users, when recovery-orientated focus was high, the quality of care was viewed highly, as was the quality of therapeutic relationships. For staff, there was a moderate correlation between recovery orientation and quality of therapeutic relationships, with considerable variability. Across all sites, staff’s scores were significantly higher than service users’ scores on the scale to assess therapeutic relationships. Staff across the sites spoke of the importance of collaborative care planning. However, the staff, service user and carer interviews revealed gaps between shared aspirations and realities. Staff accounts of routine collaboration contrasted with service user accounts and care plan reviews. Definitions and understandings of recovery varied, as did views of the role of hospital care in promoting recovery. ‘Personalisation’ was not a familiar term, although there was recognition that care was often provided in an individualised way. Managing risk was a central issue for staff, and service users were aware of measures taken to keep them safe, although their involvement in discussions was less apparent.ConclusionsOur results suggest that there is positive practice taking place within acute inpatient wards, with evidence of widespread commitment to safe, respectful, compassionate care. Although ideas of recovery were evident, there was some uncertainty about and discrepancy in the relevance of recovery ideals to inpatient care and the ability of people in acute distress to engage in recovery-focused approaches. Despite the fact that staff spoke of efforts to involve them, the majority of service users and carers did not feel that they had been genuinely involved, although they were aware of efforts to keep them safe.Future workFuture research should investigate approaches that increase contact time with service users and promote personalised, recovery-focused working; introduce shared decision-making in risk assessment and management; and improve service user experiences of care planning and review and the use of recovery-focused tools during inpatient care.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

show abstract

SEQUenCE: a service user-centred quality of care instrument for mental health services

Cited by 8 publications

References 26 publications

Psychometric properties of instruments measuring quality and satisfaction in mental health: A systematic review

Psychometric properties of instruments measuring quality and satisfaction in mental health: A systematic review

‘In some ways it all helps but in some ways it doesn't’: The complexities of service users’ experiences of inpatient mental health care in Australia

Cross-national mixed-methods comparative case study of recovery-focused mental health care planning and co-ordination in acute inpatient mental health settings (COCAPP-A)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About