The Use of a Participatory Approach to Develop a Framework for Assessing Quality of Care in Children’s Mental Health Services

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to develop a framework for assessing the quality of children's mental health services that reflects the primary concerns and perspectives of diverse stakeholders. A participatory research approach was adopted in order to incorporate caregivers of children with mental health problems, mental health service providers, and managed care administrators in identifying and developing quality of care indicators and methods for assessment. This research occurred in three phases that moved from very qualitative and exploratory to more quantitative as we sought to refine and verify the resulting Quality of Care Framework. We found that the use of a participatory approach was beneficial in ensuring the validity of research tools and utility of the framework, and also greatly increased the sense of ownership of research findings among participants.

Performance Measurement in Mental Health and Addictions Systems: A Scoping Review

“…These basic findings with respect to performance domains were reflected in frameworks that emphasized strategic goals during development (e.g., Mental Health Commission of Canada, 2015; Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care 2008; Veillard et al, 2010), as well as those that used techniques such as concept mapping or other group-based activities to identify the main components of performance (Graham et al, 2014; Holmes et al, 2014; McCusker et al, 2013; Nabitz et al., 2005a, 2005b; Resnick & Griffiths, 2010; Roeg et al, 2005; Sayal et al, 2012; Vargo et al, 2013). For example, in a study of performance definitions across stakeholder groups (clinicians, health system managers, patients, policy makers, and researchers), accessibility, continuity, patient centeredness, comprehensiveness, coordination, effectiveness, equity, and safety emerged as key components, named by three or more of the five groups (UBC Centre for Health Services and Policy Research, 2015).…”

“…Family-centered care, family–provider relationship, and, to a lesser extent, provision of direct services to family are often incorporated as features of effectiveness and person-centeredness or responsiveness (e.g., Addington et al, 2012; Balfour et al, 2016; Chovil, 2010; Hogg et al, 2008; Jones, 2005; New Zealand Mental Health and Addictions KPI Programme, 2010; Vargo et al, 2013; Waraich et al, 2010; Zima et al, 2005). Family involvement in care was particularly common in frameworks for youth (Chovil, 2010; Vargo et al, 2013; Zima et al, 2005). Australia’s National Mental Health Performance Framework offered the opportunity for potentially more comprehensive representation of family and caregivers by specifying both client and caregiver in their definitions of service effectiveness, appropriateness, responsiveness, and safety; however, indicators do not appear to have been developed in all of these domains (Brown & Pirkis, 2009; National Mental Health Performance Subcommittee, 2013).…”

Situated Motives of Lay Participants in Community Collaboratives for Children’s Mental Health

“…A typical monthly meeting is open to the public, lasts approximately 1 to 2 hours, and has an agenda that includes introductions of participants, announcements of relevant community events and trainings, updates on the local Systems of Care, and reports from Care Coordinators. Existing research has examined family involvement in the Child Services Team as part of broader outcome evaluations (Bickman, Lambert, Andrade, & Penaloaza, 2000; Hoagwood et al, 2010; Vargo, Sharrock, Johnson, & Armstrong, 2013). Nonetheless, although there is a growing body of research examining the perceptions and experiences of mental health consumers in other joint lay–professional activities (Lammers & Happell, 2003; Litva, Canvin, Shepherd, Jacoby, & Gabbay, 2009) with some exceptions (e.g., Friesen, Koroloff, Walker, & Briggs, 2011; Potter, 2010), analogous research on the experiences of family members who participate in the Community Collaboratives remains relatively under-scrutinized despite the centrality of family members in the Systems of Care design.…”