2019
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030011
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Variation in spend on young mental health across Clinical Commissioning Groups in England: a cross-sectional observational study

Abstract: ObjectivesTo investigate whether the rate of spend on child and adolescent mental health is influenced by demand for other competing services in local commissioning decisions.DesignAnalysis of spend data by Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCG), including other publicly available data to control for variation in need.SettingLocal commissioning decisions in the National Health Service.ParticipantsCommissioning of health services across 209 CCGs.Main outcome measuresAssociation between the rate of child and adoles… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
1
1

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Excluding London from an unadjusted analysis of trend over deprivation changed the estimates in 12-to 17-year-olds from 0.96 (p < 0.001) in both sexes to 1.06 in females and 1.05 in males (both p < 0.001) (S3 Table). Measures of deprivation were not found to be statistically significantly associated with spending on CYP mental health per child at the Clinical Commissioning Group level in a study by Rocks and colleagues [31]. This study included early help and targeted services (tier 2) and specialised Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) (tier 3).…”
Section: Comparison With Other Studiesmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Excluding London from an unadjusted analysis of trend over deprivation changed the estimates in 12-to 17-year-olds from 0.96 (p < 0.001) in both sexes to 1.06 in females and 1.05 in males (both p < 0.001) (S3 Table). Measures of deprivation were not found to be statistically significantly associated with spending on CYP mental health per child at the Clinical Commissioning Group level in a study by Rocks and colleagues [31]. This study included early help and targeted services (tier 2) and specialised Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) (tier 3).…”
Section: Comparison With Other Studiesmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…The funding allocated by each commissioning group to the studied CAMHS from 2015 to 2019 is included in Supporting information 2 in S2 Appendix . As described elsewhere, we excluded inpatient spend and adjusted for the population [ 21 ]. Specifically, we estimated the target population by multiplying the population aged under 18 by the estimated prevalence of common mental disorders in that age group.…”
Section: Results (Including Refined Methods)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Importantly, however, the breadth of public targets and interventions (as illustrated in Figure 1's interactional public mental health schema) necessitates action and cooperation across a number of institutions in addition to public health bodies, including health, education, social care, law enforcement and local and national government. Yet the multi‐system approach that is needed can – especially in times of austerity – be marginalised and diminished, as institutions might fight shy of the mental health agenda when other areas, such as acute medical care, are also in need (Rocks, Fazel, & Tsiachristas, 2019). This may result in a ‘fire‐fighting’ approach, whereby institutions respond reactively rather than proactively to prevent onset.…”
Section: Evidence Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%