Using Mental Health Outcome Measures in Everyday Clinical Practice
- 1 June 2006
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Australasian Psychiatry
- Vol. 14 (2) , 133-136
Abstract
Objective: To examine clinicians’ use of Mental Health Outcomes and Assessment Tools (MH-OAT), standardized clinical measures that have been introduced in NSW. Method: Two separate studies are described, which examined the use of MH-OAT within two community child and family mental health service teams in Sydney. Results: It appears that clinicians are often not completing the clinicianrated measures and rarely were they requesting and/or following up clients to complete the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Further, while clinicians are reviewing the progress of their clients, they rarely use the MH-OAT data for this purpose. Conclusions: Clinicians’ lack of adherence to MH-OAT and use of MHOAT data are discussed in terms of passive resistance and their possible perception that the process is largely irrelevant to the care of their clients.Keywords
This publication has 8 references indexed in Scilit:
- Quality, Risk Management and Governance in Mental Health: An OverviewAustralasian Psychiatry, 2005
- Routine outcome measurement by mental health-care providers: is it worth doing?The Lancet, 2002
- Outcome measurement in mental health – welcome to the revolutionThe British Journal of Psychiatry, 2002
- The Reliability and Validity of the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales: Validation in Relation to Patient Derived MeasuresAustralian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 2000
- The Health of the Nation Outcome Scales: Validating Factorial Structure and Invariance Across Two Health ServicesAustralian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 2000
- Health of the nation outcome scales for psychiatry: Are they valid?Journal of Mental Health, 2000
- Usefulness of the Health of the Nation Outcome ScalesThe British Journal of Psychiatry, 1999
- Health of the Nation Outcome Scales: A case study in general psychiatryThe British Journal of Psychiatry, 1999