Use of standardised outcome measures in adult mental health services: Randomised controlled trial

98Citations
Citations of this article
120Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: Routine use of standardised outcome measures is not universal. Aims: To evaluate the effectiveness of standardised outcome assessment. Method: A randomised controlled trial, involving 160 representative adult mental health patients and paired staff (ISRCTNI6971059). The intervention group (n=101) (a) completed monthly postal questionnaires assessing needs, quality of life, mental health problem severity and therapeutic alliance, and (b) received 3-monthly feedback. The control group (n=59) received treatment as usual. Results: The intervention did not improve primary outcomes of patient-rated unmet need and of quality of life. Other subjective secondary outcome measures were also not improved. The intervention reduced psychiatric in-patient days (3.5 v. 16.4 mean days, bootstrapped 95% CI 1.6-25.7), and hence service use costs were £2586 (95% CI 102-5391) less for intervention-group patients. Net benefit analysis indicated that the intervention was cost-effective. Conclusions: Routine use of outcome measures as implemented in this study did not improve subjective outcomes, but was associated with reduced psychiatric in-patient admissions. Declaration of interest: None Funding by the Medical Research Council.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Slade, M., McCrone, P., Kuipers, E., Leese, M., Cahill, S., Parabiaghi, A., … Thornicroft, G. (2006). Use of standardised outcome measures in adult mental health services: Randomised controlled trial. British Journal of Psychiatry, 189(OCT.), 330–336. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.105.015412

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free