Translating and Adapting Mental Health Service Outcome Measurements for Use in Taiwan

The Conceptualization of Mental Health Service Quality Assessment: Consumer Perspective

This review synthesises theoretical approaches and methodological considerations in mental health service quality assessment from consumers-perspective. We searched published articles from databases: EMBASE, MEDLINE, CIHNAL, Scopus, Web of Science, and PsycINFO. Of the 30 included papers, 16 contained instruments used to mental health quality assessment and 14 focused on theoretical constructs. The review finds that mental health quality assessment is explained and measured using constructs that focus on structure, process and outcome. The methodological issues that need critical consideration are the context and cultural norms of services, outcome perspectives, evaluator, sources of information as well as the selection of consumers and instruments. The review recommends that researchers and clinicians should consider the theoretical constructs and methodological issues in mental health quality assessment.

Mediation and moderation effects of health system structure and process on the quality of mental health services in Ghana - structural equation modelling

INTRODUCTION

Incorporating consumers' perspectives into the quality of mental health service measurement is a growing priority among mental health professionals' and policymakers. Despite this, there is limited empirical evidence related to consumer perspectives of quality of mental health services. This study, therefore, aims to measure the mediation and moderation effects of health system structure and process on mental health quality in Ghana.

METHODS

A random sample of 510 consumers were recruited to complete the Verona Satisfaction Scale (54-items), together with the WHO Disability Assessment Instrument (36 items) using the Redcap application. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Structural Equation Modelling were used to test the hypothesised theory using STATA 15.

RESULTS

The CFA showed that the hypothesised model had a good fit to the data. The findings confirmed the hypothesis that the process constructs mediate the relationship between the health system structure and the outcome of mental health services. Specifically, the health system structure had a positive and significant causal relationship with the mediator-process (β = 0.60; p<0.01) and outcome (β = 0.47; p<0.01). Additionally, the mediator-process had a positive causal relationship with the outcome of the mental health services (β = 0.32; p<0.01). Insurance status (β = 0.07; p>0.05) and type of services (β = 0.025; p>0.05) had a positive moderating effect on the relationship between health system structure and outcome but were not significant.

CONCLUSION

Improvements to mental health system structure and the process could promote the quality of services as experienced by consumers. Government stakeholders are encouraged to accordingly strengthen health systems with the aim of improving the mental health outcomes for consumers.

Scales for assessing patient satisfaction with mental health care: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Patient satisfaction with mental health care has become an important construct in research and routine care. Both as a process measure and as an outcome criterion in its own right, it needs to be assessed with appropriate scales.

PURPOSE

To provide a review of scales for assessing patient satisfaction in different settings, their characteristics and the content of care that they cover.

METHOD

A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted to identify studies that used a scale to assess patient satisfaction with care in mental health services. Peer reviewed articles were screened by two independent reviewers and included when they met predetermined criteria. Data on the characteristics of scales found in at least two studies were extracted and a qualitative analysis was performed to identify the contents of included scales.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight scales were identified. They vary substantially in terms of structure, length, focus and quality. The qualitative analyses identified a total of 19 contents of care that were covered in the scales. The most consistent contents across scales were overall satisfaction, followed by relationship with staff and staff skills.

DISCUSSION

A wide range of scales have been used to assess patient satisfaction with mental health care in different settings. Whilst some scales have been frequently used, there is no consensus on a gold standard one. The choice of the most appropriate scale depends on the aim of the assessment, the setting, the content that should be covered, and the time available for the assessment.