Skip to main content
×
×
Home

The development of an outcome measure for liaison mental health services

  • Else Guthrie (a1), Mathew Harrison (a2), Richard Brown (a3), Rajdeep Sandhu (a4), Peter Trigwell (a2), Seri Abraham (a5), Shazada Nawaz (a5), Peter Kelsall (a4) and Rachel Thomasson (a6)...
Abstract
Aims and method

To develop and pilot a clinician-rated outcome scale to evaluate symptomatic outcomes in liaison psychiatry services. Three hundred and sixty patient contacts with 207 separate individuals were rated using six subscales (mood, psychosis, cognition, substance misuse, mind–body problems and behavioural disturbance) plus two additional items (side-effects of medication and capacity to consent for medical treatment). Each item was rated on a five-point scale from 0 to 5 (nil, mild, moderate, severe and very severe).

Results

The liaison outcome measure was acceptable and easy to use. All subscales showed acceptable interrater reliability, with the exception of the mind–body subscale. Overall, the measure appears to show stability and sensitivity to change.

Clinical implications

The measure provides a useful and robust way to determine symptomatic change in a liaison mental health setting, although the mind–body subscale requires modification.

Declaration of interest

None.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      The development of an outcome measure for liaison mental health services
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      The development of an outcome measure for liaison mental health services
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      The development of an outcome measure for liaison mental health services
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Corresponding author
Correspondence to Rachel Thomasson (dr.rachel.thomasson@gmail.com)
References
Hide All
1Crawford, MJ, Zoha, M, Macdonald, AJD, Kingdon, D. Improving the quality of mental health services using patient outcome data: making the most of HoNOS. BJPsych Bull 2017; 41: 172–6.
2Wing, JK, Beevor, AS, Curtis, RH, Park, SB, Hadden, S, Burns, A. Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS). Research and development. Br J Psychiatry 1998; 172: 11–8.
3Fossey, M, Parsonage, M. Outcomes and Performance in Liaison Psychiatry: Developing a Measurement Framework. Centre for Mental Health, 2014.
4Trigwell, P. Framework for Routine Outcome Measurement in Liaison Psychiatry (FROM-LP). FR/LP/02. Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2015.
5Guy, W. ECDEU Assessment Manual for Psychopharmacology, Revised. US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1976.
6Pan, SQ, Vega, M, Vella, AJ, Archer, BH, Parlett, GR. A mini-Delphi approach: an improvement on single round techniques. Prog Tour Hosp Res 1996; 2: 2739.
7Kazis, LE, Anderson, JJ, Meenan, RF. Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status. Med Care 1989; 27: S178–89.
8Barkham, M, Bewick, B, Mullin, T, Gilbody, S, Connell, J, Cahill, J, et al. The CORE-10: a short measure of psychological distress for routine use in the psychological therapies. Couns Psychother Res 2013; 13: 313.
9Inouye, SK, Van Dyck, CH, Alessi, CA, Balkin, S, Siegal, AP, Horwitz, RI. Clarifying confusion: the confusion assessment method. A new method for detection of delirium. Ann Intern Med 1990; 113: 941–8.
10Landis, J, Koch, G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33: 159174.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

BJPsych Bulletin
  • ISSN: 2056-4694
  • EISSN: 2056-4708
  • URL: /core/journals/bjpsych-bulletin
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed

The development of an outcome measure for liaison mental health services

  • Else Guthrie (a1), Mathew Harrison (a2), Richard Brown (a3), Rajdeep Sandhu (a4), Peter Trigwell (a2), Seri Abraham (a5), Shazada Nawaz (a5), Peter Kelsall (a4) and Rachel Thomasson (a6)...
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.

×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *