Search

Background: Parent assessment of outpatient child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) is now part of the Norwegian quality indicator system. This national survey included a validated questionnaire that assessed three aspects of care from a parental perspective., Material and Methods: Questionnaires were mailed to 17,080 parents of children and adolescents receiving care from CAMHS on an outpatient basis between 1 September and 31 December 2006. Two postal reminders were sent and telephone interviews were conducted with a sample of non-respondents. 7 906 (46%) parents returned a completed questionnaire. Three scales about treatment providers, treatment outcome and information/influence were identified (scales scored 0 to 100 where 100 represent the best experiences)., Results: The parents were most satisfied with the treatment providers (national mean 75). The national mean for the treatment outcome was 72 and for the scale concerning information and patients' possibilities to influence decisions the mean score was 59. The clinic scores varied considerably; the score for information and influence varied most (48-68). Few scores were however significantly different from the national average., Interpretation: Most parents have good experience with the CAMHS. The scale concerning information and influence has the greatest potential for improvement. Several CAMHS had higher scores for all aspects of parent experience and may have useful information to convey to other clinics.

Background: General practitioners' evaluation of Community Mental Health Centres (CMHC) has become a part of the Norwegian system of quality indicators. On the basis of a national survey, we present the way in which GPs have assessed the quality of 77 CMHCs., Material and Methods: A questionnaire was posted to every GP in Norway from November 2005 to March 2006. This was followed up with 2-3 reminders and telephone interviews. 2,415 out of 3,704 GPs (65%) responded., Results: GPs gave highest score for professional competence, the average being 55 on a scale of 0-100, where 100 is best. They gave lowest score for counselling (30) and staff situation (45). The average score given to the various CMHCs varied a lot for all dimensions, the largest difference being for counselling, with the highest average 58 and the lowest 8. There were many significant differences between various CMHCs' scores and the national average. When it came to counselling, the average score for 20 CMHCs was significantly different from that for the other CMHCs., Interpretation: As GPs are important collaborators and users of the CMHCs, their views are valuable. The present findings need to be discussed. Many of the community mental health centres received all in all positive feedback from the GPs, suggesting that they may have useful experiences to share.

Background: Questionnaires on patient experience are increasingly used as quality indicators in the health services. There is limited evidence relating to alternative approaches to surveying patients within this field. We wanted to assess the effect of different methods of data collection on response rates and scores produced by a self-administered questionnaire on patient experience for adult inpatients receiving mental health care., Material and Methods: Data were collected from adult inpatients treated at three community mental health centres affiliated with the psychiatric clinic at Stavanger University hospital in spring 2005. The inclusion period was nine weeks, with three designs at consecutive time periods: A, a postal survey following discharge; B, a clinical survey before discharge; and C, patients given the choice of A or B., Results: The response rate was highest with the postal design (38% vs. 24% and 23% respectively), but the differences were related to one additional reminder in the postal design. Out of the 11 questions, 4 had significantly poorer scores for the postal design. Questionnaire scores were significantly poorer with the postal design; 50 (on a scale from 0 to 100), vs. 59 and 63 in design B and C respectively., Interpretation: The choice of data collection methods influences the results in user surveys in mental health care. This is an important consideration in the planning of studies and in the interpretation of the results, and in the comparison of results between studies using different data collection methods.

Background: This study describes the development and testing of the Psychiatric In-Patient Experiences Questionnaire (PIPEQ)., Material and Methods: Questionnaire development was based on a literature review, qualitative interviews with patients, and expert opinion. The questionnaire was tested in a postal survey among inpatients at three community health centres affiliated with the psychiatric clinic of Stavanger University hospital during spring 2005. 244 patients received the questionnaire; either they got the questionnaire by mail after discharge or at the institution before discharge., Results: 68 (28%) patients responded to the questionnaire. Items had low levels of missing data. Factor analysis showed that 11 widely applicable items contribute to a measure of overall experiences. Item-total correlations ranged from 0.55 to 0.82. Cronbach's alpha exceeded the criterion of 0.9. Construct validity was supported by comparisons with variables related to patient experience, including overall satisfaction, extent of patient say in the medication decision, necessity of coercion, and mental health status., Interpretation: The PIPEQ is a brief instrument that covers important aspects of health care experience for psychiatric inpatients and has good evidence for internal reliability and construct validity.

Background: The purpose of this paper is to describe the development and evaluation of the patient experiences questionnaire (PEQ) for somatic outpatients., Material and Methods: Literature review, focus groups, interviews with patients and clinicians, and pre-testing of questionnaire items were used. A postal survey among 12,525 patients of 23 outpatient clinics for adults in two Norwegian health regions was conducted during 2003., Results: 6824 (55%) patients responded to the questionnaire. Low levels of missing data suggest that the questionnaire is acceptable to patients. Factor analysis of items deemed applicable to all patients produced three scales: clinic access (2 items), communication (6 items) and organisation (4 items). The remaining items contributed to the hypothesised scales of information (6 items), hospital standards (3 items), and pre-visit experience (3 items). With the exception of the pre-visit experience scale, the levels of Cronbach's alpha met the criterion of 0.7. The great majority of the results of validity testing were as hypothesised. Correlations between the scales ranged from 0.30 (clinic access and information) to 0.72 (communication and information). As hypothesised, scores were significantly related to responses to questions about overall satisfaction, general health, and age., Interpretation: The outpatient experience questionnaire is a self-administered instrument that includes the most important aspects of experience from the outpatients' perspective. Three core dimensions for use in a shortened version have been identified.