Impact of a peer-review network on the quality of inpatient low secure mental health services: cluster randomised control trial

Excellence in forensic psychiatry services: international survey of qualities and correlates

BACKGROUND

Excellence is that quality that drives continuously improving outcomes for patients. Excellence must be measurable. We set out to measure excellence in forensic mental health services according to four levels of organisation and complexity (basic, standard, progressive and excellent) across seven domains: values and rights; clinical organisation; consistency; timescale; specialisation; routine outcome measures; research and development.

AIMS

To validate the psychometric properties of a measurement scale to test which objective features of forensic services might relate to excellence: for example, university linkages, service size and integrated patient pathways across levels of therapeutic security.

METHOD

A survey instrument was devised by a modified Delphi process. Forensic leads, either clinical or academic, in 48 forensic services across 5 jurisdictions completed the questionnaire.

RESULTS

Regression analysis found that the number of security levels, linked patient pathways, number of in-patient teams and joint university appointments predicted total excellence score.

CONCLUSIONS

Larger services organised according to stratified therapeutic security and with strong university and research links scored higher on this measure of excellence. A weakness is that these were self-ratings. Reliability could be improved with peer review and with objective measures such as quality and quantity of research output. For the future, studies are needed of the determinants of other objective measures of better outcomes for patients, including shorter lengths of stay, reduced recidivism and readmission, and improved physical and mental health and quality of life.

The Perspective of Key Stakeholders on the Impact of Reaccreditation in a Large National Mental Health Institute

BACKGROUND

Obtaining and maintaining accreditation is an important component of high-quality mental health care services. However, research is lacking, and explanations for quantitative observations surrounding the sustainability of improvements are unfounded in qualitative data. The aim of this study was to explore how accreditation, specifically that provided by Joint Commission International, affects service quality at the Institute of Mental Health in Singapore to advance our understanding of its effects and the durability of improvements.

METHODS

Researchers conducted 21 qualitative semistructured interviews with key informants to understand how obtaining reaccreditation was affecting the institute. The data were analyzed thematically to produce an understanding of the various ways in which accreditation improved care quality.

RESULTS

Accreditation contributed to the improvement of care via several mechanisms. Although participants universally endorsed the positive impact of accreditation on safety, it was harder to pinpoint specific outcomes that improved because of it. Accreditation, however, had unintended consequences: Unnecessary processes arising from overinterpretation of standards led to several staff behaviors that might ultimately compromise the sustainability of new processes.

CONCLUSION

Although accreditation drives improvement via clear mechanisms, policy makers must be aware of unintended consequences. Organizations struggling with accreditation must clearly communicate the rationale for the implementation of new processes linked to reaccreditation. With a clear purpose, changes may be more sustainable.

Perspective On Excellence in Forensic Mental Health Services: What We Can Learn From Oncology and Other Medical Services

We propose that excellence in forensic and other mental health services can be recognized by the abilities necessary to conduct randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and equivalent forms of rigorous quantitative research to continuously improve the outcomes of treatment as usual (TAU). Forensic mental health services (FMHSs) are growing, are high cost, and increasingly provide the main access route to more intensive, organized, and sustained pathways through care and treatment. A patient newly diagnosed with a cancer can expect to be enrolled in RCTs comparing innovations with the current best TAU. The same should be provided for patients newly diagnosed with severe mental illnesses and particularly those detained and at risk of prolonged periods in a secure hospital. We describe FMHSs in four levels 1 to 4, basic to excellent, according to seven domains: values or qualities, clinical organization, consistency, timescale, specialization, routine outcome measures, and research. Excellence is not elitism. Not all centers need to achieve excellence, though all should be of high quality. Services can provide each population with a network of centers with access to one center of excellence. Excellence is the standard needed to drive the virtuous circle of research and development that is necessary for teaching, training, and the pursuit of new knowledge and better outcomes. Substantial advances in treatment of severe mental disorders require a drive at a national and international level to create services that meet these standards of excellence and are focused, active, and productive to drive better functional outcomes for service users.