Search

Background There is global interest in the reconfiguration of community mental health services, including primary care, to improve clinical and cost effectiveness. Aims This study seeks to describe patterns of service use, continuity of care, health risks, physical healthcare monitoring and the balance between primary and secondary mental healthcare for people with severe mental illness in receipt of secondary mental healthcare in the UK. Method We conducted an epidemiological medical records review in three UK sites. We identified 297 cases randomly selected from the three participating mental health services. Data were manually extracted from electronic patient medical records from both secondary and primary care, for a 2-year period (2012-2014). Continuous data were summarised by mean and s.d. or median and interquartile range (IQR). Categorical data were summarised as percentages. Results The majority of care was from secondary care practitioners: of the 18 210 direct contacts recorded, 76% were from secondary care (median, 36.5; IQR, 14-68) and 24% were from primary care (median, 10; IQR, 5-20). There was evidence of poor longitudinal continuity: in primary care, 31% of people had poor longitudinal continuity (Modified Modified Continuity Index ≤0.5), and 43% had a single named care coordinator in secondary care services over the 2 years. Conclusions The study indicates scope for improvement in supporting mental health service delivery in primary care. Greater knowledge of how care is organised presents an opportunity to ensure some rebalancing of the care that all people with severe mental illness receive, when they need it. A future publication will examine differences between the three sites that participated in this study.

Background There is global interest in the reconfiguration of community mental health services, including primary care, to improve clinical and cost effectiveness. Aims This study seeks to describe patterns of service use, continuity of care, health risks, physical healthcare monitoring and the balance between primary and secondary mental healthcare for people with severe mental illness in receipt of secondary mental healthcare in the UK. Method We conducted an epidemiological medical records review in three UK sites. We identified 297 cases randomly selected from the three participating mental health services. Data were manually extracted from electronic patient medical records from both secondary and primary care, for a 2-year period (2012-2014). Continuous data were summarised by mean and s.d. or median and interquartile range (IQR). Categorical data were summarised as percentages. Results The majority of care was from secondary care practitioners: of the 18 210 direct contacts recorded, 76% were from secondary care (median, 36.5; IQR, 14-68) and 24% were from primary care (median, 10; IQR, 5-20). There was evidence of poor longitudinal continuity: in primary care, 31% of people had poor longitudinal continuity (Modified Modified Continuity Index ≤0.5), and 43% had a single named care coordinator in secondary care services over the 2 years. Conclusions The study indicates scope for improvement in supporting mental health service delivery in primary care. Greater knowledge of how care is organised presents an opportunity to ensure some rebalancing of the care that all people with severe mental illness receive, when they need it. A future publication will examine differences between the three sites that participated in this study.

In this article, we present an exemplar of the initial theory-building phase of theory-driven evaluation for the PARTNERS2 project, a collaborative care intervention for people with experience of psychosis in England. Initial theory-building involved analysis of the literature, interviews with key leaders and focus groups with service users. The initial programme theory was developed from these sources in an iterative process between researchers and stakeholders (service users, practitioners, commissioners) involving four activities: articulation of 442 explanatory statements systematically developed using realist methods; debate and consensus; communication; and interrogation. We refute two criticisms of theory-driven evaluation of complex interventions. We demonstrate how the process of initial theory-building made a meaningful contribution to our complex intervention in five ways. Although time-consuming, it allowed us to develop an internally coherent and well-documented intervention. This study and the lessons learnt provide a detailed resource for other researchers wishing to build theory for theory-driven evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Carers of people with psychosis are at a greater risk of physical and mental health problems compared to the general population. Yet, not all carers will experience a decline in health. This predicament has provided the rationale for research studies exploring what factors predict poor wellbeing in carers of people with psychosis. Our study builds on previous research by testing the predictive value of demographic variables on carer wellbeing within a single regression model. METHODS: To achieve this aim, we conducted secondary analysis on two trial data sets that were merged and recoded for the purposes of this study. RESULTS: Contrary to our hypotheses, only carer gender and age predicted carer wellbeing; with lower levels of carer wellbeing being associated with being female or younger (aged under 50). However, the final regression model explained only 11% of the total variance. CONCLUSIONS: Suggestions for future research are discussed in light of the limitations inherent in secondary analysis studies. Further research is needed where sample sizes are sufficient to explore the interactive and additive impact of other predictor variables.

Loneliness and social isolation have become significant concerns in many countries, particularly amongst people experiencing mental health problems. A social intervention—Connecting People—has been found to increase their access to social capital, though it has been difficult to implement with high fidelity in community mental health teams (CMHTs) in England. This study aimed to evaluate outcomes for mental health service users of a practitioner-led implementation of Connecting People in CMHTs. It used a pragmatic non-randomised two-group pre-post study to evaluate the implementation process in CMHTs. Implementation materials co-produced with service users were provided to the intervention teams for practitioners to use with the support of a senior social worker in each mental health National Health Service Trust (n = 5). Service users were interviewed at baseline (n = 151) and at six-month follow-up (n = 127), and their outcome and cost data were analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. Analysis of primary and secondary outcome variables found no differences between the intervention and control groups. The economic evaluation found no significant differences between groups in mean costs or outcomes. The findings suggest that it could be difficult for social workers to implement Connecting People in CMHTs or that it does not improve outcomes for CMHT users.

BACKGROUND: Public mental health (PMH) is a global challenge and a UK priority area for action. However, to progress, practitioners require a stronger evidence base regarding the effectiveness of approaches, particularly regarding promotion and prevention through community-centred interventions. In addition, policy-makers need to understand what is being delivered, particularly in areas of high need, to identify promising practices or gaps in PMH provision. Finally, and importantly, the public need better information regarding what approaches and services are available to them. We report a protocol designed to (1) identify the types of community-centred interventions used in purposively selected diverse geographical areas of England to improve PMH outcomes and (2) describe the type, target population, content and outcome measures of each intervention. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Five local authority areas of England were selected based on either high social deprivation or differing ethnic population statistics and geographical locations. Community-centred interventions in each area will be identified through: (1) desk-based data capture from standardised searches of publicly-available information (eg, policy, strategy and intervention advertising), (2) established professional networks and service contacts, (3) chain-referral sampling of individuals involved in local mental health promotion and prevention and (4) peer researchers, who will use their personal experience and local knowledge to help identify potentially relevant organisations. Data on the key features of the interventions will be extracted from individuals either by structured interviews or by electronic questionnaires with information regarding the intervention(s) of which they have knowledge. Initial data analysis will involve tabulating descriptive information and grouping interventions according to intervention type, target population, risk/protective factor and intended primary outcome. A descriptive co

In this article, we present an exemplar of the initial theory-building phase of theory-driven evaluation for the PARTNERS2 project, a collaborative care intervention for people with experience of psychosis in England. Initial theory-building involved analysis of the literature, interviews with key leaders and focus groups with service users. The initial programme theory was developed from these sources in an iterative process between researchers and stakeholders (service users, practitioners, commissioners) involving four activities: articulation of 442 explanatory statements systematically developed using realist methods; debate and consensus; communication; and interrogation. We refute two criticisms of theory-driven evaluation of complex interventions. We demonstrate how the process of initial theory-building made a meaningful contribution to our complex intervention in five ways. Although time-consuming, it allowed us to develop an internally coherent and well-documented intervention. This study and the lessons learnt provide a detailed resource for other researchers wishing to build theory for theory-driven evaluation.

Mental health stigma and discrimination are significant problems. Common coping orientations include: concealing mental health problems, challenging others and educating others. We describe the use of common stigma coping orientations and explain variations within a sample of English mental health service users. Cross-sectional survey data were collected as part of the Viewpoint survey of mental health service users’ experiences of discrimination (n = 3005). Linear regression analyses were carried out to identify factors associated with the three stigma coping orientations. The most common coping orientation was to conceal mental health problems (73%), which was strongly associated with anticipated discrimination. Only 51% ever challenged others because of discriminating behaviour, this being related to experienced discrimination, but also to higher confidence to tackle stigma. Although stigma coping orientations vary by context, individuals often choose to conceal problems, which is associated with greater anticipated and experienced discrimination and less confidence to challenge stigma. The direction of this association requires further investigation.

Aims. This study builds on existing research on the prevalence and consequences of mental illness discrimination by investigating and quantifying the relationships between experienced discrimination and costs of healthcare and leisure activities/social participation among secondary mental health service users in England. Methods. We use data from the Mental Illness-Related Investigations on Discrimination (MIRIAD) study (n = 202) and a subsample of the Viewpoint study (n = 190). We examine experiences of discrimination due to mental illness in the domains of personal relationships, community activities, and health care, and how such experienced discrimination relates to patterns of service use and engagement in leisure activities. Results. Our findings show that the cost of health services used for individuals who reported previous experiences of discrimination in a healthcare setting was almost twice as high as for those who did not report any discrimination during the last 12 months (Relative Risk: 1.73; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.39, 2.17) and this was maintained after controlling for symptoms and functioning. Experienced discrimination in healthcare (Relative Risk: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.81, 0.84) or in relationships (Relative Risk: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.87, 0.91), however, was associated with lower participation in, and hence lower costs of, leisure activities. Individuals who reported any discrimination in a healthcare setting had, on average, £434 higher costs associated with health service use while reported discrimination in the community was associated with increased leisure costs of £32. Conclusions. These findings make an important initial step towards understanding the magnitude of the costs of mental health-related discrimination.