Mental health nurse supplementary prescribing: mapping progress 1 year after implementation

Psychiatrists' and nurses' views of mental health nurse supplementary prescribing: a survey

Aims and Method

A questionnaire survey of psychiatrists and mental health nurses was conducted to look at their awareness of nurse supplementary prescribing and its impact on patient care.

Results

Response rate was 49.5% for psychiatrists and 23% for nurses. Most nurses (96.2%) and psychiatrists (91%) were aware of nurse supplementary prescribing, but more nurses than psychiatrists felt that it will provide patients quicker access to medication (P=0.023) and improve patient care (P=0.0003). Although two-thirds of the nurses felt confident to be a nurse prescriber, only 13% had actually approached a psychiatrist to be their supervisor. Most psychiatrists (54.4%) did not feel confident to act as supervisors.

Clinical Implications

Unlike nurses, psychiatrists were cautious about potential benefits of nurse supplementary prescribing on patient care. Both nurses and psychiatrists expressed concerns. As the expansion of nurse prescribing occurs, it is important for trusts to work actively with nurses and psychiatrists to address these concerns.

Supplementary prescribing: a new way of working for psychiatrists and nurses

Aims and Method

To describe the implementation of supplementary prescribing and nurse-led care in an acute in-patient unit. The issues of delegation and distribution of responsibility were explicitly addressed. Structures were developed for training and supervision, to ensure improved medicines management in the acute setting.

Results

We present our five-step model of nurse-led in-patient care and our experience of using a clinical management plan for 33 patients.

Clinical Implications

Implementation of supplementary prescribing provides a model for new ways of working, requiring engagement of both doctors and nurses, clear delegation and distribution of responsibilities, and well-developed governance structures.

Involved, inputting or informing: "Shared" decision making in adult mental health care

Background

A diagnosis of serious mental illness can impact on the whole family. Families informally provide significant amounts of care but are disproportionately at risk of carer burden when compared to those supporting people with other long‐term conditions. Shared decision making (SDM) is an ethical model of health communication associated with positive health outcomes; however, there has been little research to evaluate how routinely family is invited to participate in SDM, or what this looks like in practice.

Objective

This UK study aimed to better understand how the family caregivers of those diagnosed with SMI are currently involved in decision making, particularly decisions about treatment options including prescribed medication. Objectives were to

Explore the extent to which family members wish to be involved in decisions about prescribed medication

Determine how and when professionals engage family in these decisions

Identify barriers and facilitators associated with the engagement of family in decisions about treatment.

Participants

Open‐ended questions were sent to professionals and family members to elicit written responses. Qualitative responses were analysed thematically.

Results

Themes included the definition of involvement and “rules of engagement.” Staff members are gatekeepers for family involvement, and the process is not democratic. Family and staff ascribe practical, rather than recovery‐oriented roles to family, with pre‐occupation around notions of adherence.

Conclusions

Staff members need support, training and education to apply SDM. Time to exchange information is vital but practically difficult. Negotiated teams, comprising of staff, service users, family, peers as applicable, with ascribed roles and responsibilities could support SDM.

National survey of nurse prescribing in mental health services; a follow-up 6 years on

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Nurse prescribing allows nurses, after specific training, to prescribe medications under certain conditions. This article describes the third in a series of surveys of mental health services in England to understand how nurse prescribing is being used across the country. While there is research evidence that shows nurse prescribing to be as safe as prescribing by doctors and that service users typically find it at least as acceptable, there is a lack of detailed evidence about current forms of nurse prescribing practice specifically in mental health services. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: The survey found that the number of nurse prescribers has increased over the last few years. Nurse prescribers are increasingly prescribing in a form ('independent prescribing') that makes them independently responsible for prescribing decisions without working to a plan laid out by a doctor. Mental health organisations are increasingly planning in a systematic way how to identify, train and ensure good practice in nurse prescribing. This study demonstrates that growth in numbers of nurse prescribers can take place over an extended time period. The study demonstrates that the exact model of nurse prescribing will influence its applicability in different types of service. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: Nurse prescribing is becoming increasingly common in mental health services, changing roles for nurses and the experience of services for service users. However, there is great variation between organisations in this regard. Research is needed regarding the outcomes and any risks of independent nurse prescribing specifically in mental health compared to medical prescribing.

ABSTRACT

Introduction This paper reports the latest in a series of national surveys of nurse prescribing in mental health organizations in England. Aim To describe and understand changes and trends in the use of nurse prescribing nationally. Methods Postal survey to all 53 National Health Service Mental Health Trusts (publicly funded provider organizations); 75% responded (n = 40). Results Numbers of nurse prescribers (NPs) have grown significantly in the last 6 years, although remain a small percentage of the total Mental Health Nursing workforce. Most NPs are in community services, particularly community mental health teams and drug/alcohol services. Independent prescribing has now become the most common form of NP, replacing supplementary prescribing. Discussion Overall growth in numbers of NPs has continued, but remains marked by large variance in numbers between organizations. The study evidences that the particular form of nurse prescribing will influence its applicability in different clinical settings and that sustained increase over time in NP numbers is feasible at a national level, even with local variation in uptake. Implications for practice Nurse prescribing has become well embedded in many organizations although large-scale adoption may be hindered by the lack of a definitive evidence base as to outcomes compared with those from medical prescribing.

An evaluation of team and individual formularies to support independent prescribing in mental health care

Mental health nurses have been entitled to train to become independent prescribers since May 2006; although the number of trained nurse prescribers seems to have increased steadily, a significant number of them have not actually undertaken prescribing roles on completion of their training or have limited their practice to supplementary prescribing. In order to support existing independent prescribers and to assist those nurses who have trained but are yet to prescribe independently, a mental health trust has piloted the use of individual and team formularies. An evaluation of this project indicated that formularies were well received by existing independent prescribers and were seen as a helpful instrument to support newly qualified and supplementary prescribers in their bid to become independent. Formularies can clarify and formalize each prescriber's area of competence, thus setting clear boundaries, reducing uncertainty and enhancing prescribers' confidence and willingness to take on this new role. Formularies may also be used to enhance communication with service users and further develop shared decision making. Effective procedures need to be in place to ensure formularies are up to date and reflect local practice.

Non-medical prescribing: audit, practice and views

Non-medical prescribing is increasingly utilized in clinical care and UK Standards have been produced for this. This study was undertaken to investigate compliance with these standards which were adopted by one mental health service and to review whether any changes were necessary to existing arrangements monitoring this compliance. A questionnaire was distributed to all 24 non-medical prescribers from one UK Mental Health Trust. Participants were asked to respond to questions about demographic data and prescribing practices. We also asked them to rate their experience on a 5-point scale. In all, 83% of non-medical prescribers responded. The UK Standards were met even though there was a shortfall in the uptake of training and supervision. Non-medical prescribers from the Community Drug Team and Older People's Service prescribed a narrow range of speciality drugs than any other category of drugs, but prescribed more often. UK Standards were met by the majority of non-medical prescribers. However, concerns were noted about a shortfall in training, supervision and experience of some non-medical prescribers. Conflict with psychiatrists was reported but their availability for support when necessary was valued. Non-medical prescribers believed that their input with non-medical prescribing had benefited patients.

Roles of the non-medical prescribing leads within organisations across a Strategic Health Authority: perceived functions and factors supporting the role

Objectives

Extending the roles of nurses, pharmacists and allied health professionals to include prescribing has been identified as one way of improving service provision. In the UK, over 50 000 non-medical healthcare professionals are now qualified to prescribe. Implementation of non-medical prescribing ( NMP) is crucial to realise the potential return on investment. The UK Department of Health recommends a NMP lead to be responsible for the implementation of NMP within organisations. The aim of this study was to explore the role of NMP leads in organisations across one Strategic Health Authority (SHA) and to inform future planning with regards to the criteria for those adopting this role, the scope of the role and factors enabling the successful execution of the role.

Methods

Thirty-nine NMP leads across one SHA were approached. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted. Issues explored included the perceived role of the NMP lead, safety and clinical governance procedures and facilitators to the role. Transcribed audiotapes were coded and analysed using thematic analytical techniques.

Key findings

In total, 27/39 (69.2%) NMP leads were interviewed. The findings highlight the key role that the NMP lead plays with regards to the support and development of NMP within National Health Service trusts. Processes used to appoint NMP leads lacked clarity and varied between trusts. Only two NMP leads had designated or protected time for their role. Strategic influence, operational management and clinical governance were identified as key functions. Factors that supported the role included organisational support, level of influence and dedicated time.

Conclusion

The NMP lead plays a significant role in the development and implementation of NMP. Clear national guidance is needed with regards to the functions of this role, the necessary attributes for individuals recruited into this post and the time that should be designated to it. This is important as prescribing is extended to include other groups of non-medical healthcare professionals.

Nurse prescribing of medicines in Western European and Anglo-Saxon countries: a systematic review of the literature

Background

A growing number of countries are introducing some form of nurse prescribing. However, international reviews concerning nurse prescribing are scarce and lack a systematic and theoretical approach. The aim of this review was twofold: firstly, to gain insight into the scientific and professional literature describing the extent to and the ways in which nurse prescribing has been realised or is being introduced in Western European and Anglo-Saxon countries; secondly, to identify possible mechanisms underlying the introduction and organisation of nurse prescribing on the basis of Abbott's theory on the division of professional labor.

Methods

A comprehensive search of six literature databases and seven websites was performed without any limitation as to date of publication, language or country. Additionally, experts in the field of nurse prescribing were consulted. A three stage inclusion process, consisting of initial sifting, more detailed selection and checking full-text publications, was performed independently by pairs of reviewers. Data were synthesized using narrative and tabular methods.

Results

One hundred and twenty-four publications met the inclusion criteria. So far, seven Western European and Anglo-Saxon countries have implemented nurse prescribing of medicines, viz., Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, Sweden, the UK and the USA. The Netherlands and Spain are in the process of introducing nurse prescribing. A diversity of external and internal forces has led to the introduction of nurse prescribing internationally. The legal, educational and organizational conditions under which nurses prescribe medicines vary considerably between countries; from situations where nurses prescribe independently to situations in which prescribing by nurses is only allowed under strict conditions and supervision of physicians.

Conclusions

Differences between countries are reflected in the jurisdictional settlements between the nursing and medical professions concerning prescribing. In some countries, nurses share (full) jurisdiction with the medical profession, whereas in other countries nurses prescribe in a subordinate position. In most countries the jurisdiction over prescribing remains predominantly with the medical profession. There seems to be a mechanism linking the jurisdictional settlements between professions with the forces that led to the introduction of nurse prescribing. Forces focussing on efficiency appear to lead to more extensive prescribing rights.

Nurse prescribing in specialist mental health (part 2): the views and experiences of psychiatrists and health professionals

The establishment of working relationships between nurse prescribers and other health professionals, particularly psychiatrists offering supervision, can be a rewarding one. However there remains little guidance in terms of how this can be achieved and the opinions of those from different disciplines in specialist mental health teams. This study aims to look at the views and experiences of psychiatrists and other mental health professionals regarding nurse prescribing. Nine health professionals from a multidisciplinary mental health team attended a focus group; and two psychiatrists were interviewed, both with varying degrees of supervision experience. Psychiatrists reported concerns about prescribing in terms of themselves needing better support and communication, and perhaps having an involvement in the selection process. Nonetheless, the psychiatrist who had experience of supervision reported that this was highly positive. Overall, health professionals stated that nurse prescribing enhanced team working; however, most had limited knowledge about the role. Further training for teams, and the establishment of a good supervisory relationship and an agreed working structure are required to fully integrate this competency into specialist mental health services.

Does psychopharmacology training enhance the knowledge of mental health nurses who prescribe?

The implementation of Mental Health Nurse (MHN) prescribing in the UK remains disappointing. A much cited critique of MHNs prescribing is that it would be unsafe, as MHN would not have the appropriate knowledge of pharmacology to practise mental health prescribing. The knowledge of pharmacology of MHNs with the prescribing qualification has not been assessed in the UK. In addition, the views of MHNs with the prescribing qualification who have undertaken a psychopharmacology course have not been explored. The aims of this study are to measure the efficacy of a 10-day advanced training programme on psychopharmacology on the knowledge levels of MHNs with the prescribing qualification; and to explore the positive and negative experiences of individual participants of the training in psychopharmacology and how it supported their prescribing practice. A repeated measures design was used in which participants acted as their own controls. Participants were assessed 10 weeks before the training programme and again on day one of the training programme using a Multiple Choice Questionnaire. In addition, a series of focus groups were conducted to explore the helpful and unhelpful aspects of the course in sustaining the MHNs' prescribing practice. Following the training period there were significant increases in the MHNs' knowledge of psychopharmacology in comparison with the two base line means. Participants when interviewed 18 months after completing the training described the training as a helpful though they described it had not resulted in large increases in prescribing practice, citing systemic barriers to its implementation. Short and focussed training for MHNs who prescribe may increase their knowledge of psychopharmacology. The development of such programmes may well be part of the solution to support MHNs with the prescribing qualification to prescribe, supported by the views of the MHNs who participated in the focus groups. However, further work is required to remove organizational barriers. The data raise questions both about the current suitability of nurse prescribing preparation programmes in the UK and the suitability of NHS settings to support MHN to prescribe.

Nurse prescribing in mental health: national survey

Mental health nurses can now train to become independent prescribers as well as supplementary prescribers. Independent nurse prescribing can potentially help to reorganize mental health services, increase access to medicines and improve service user information, satisfaction and concordance. However, mental health nursing has been slow to undertake prescribing roles, and there has been little work conducted to look at where nurse prescribing is proving successful, and those areas where it is less so. This survey was designed to collect information from directors of nursing in mental health trusts about the numbers of mental health prescribers in England, gather views about prescribing in practice, and elicit intentions with regards to the development of nurse prescribing. In some Trusts, the number of mental health nurse prescribers has increased to the point where wider impacts on workforce, the configuration of teams and services are inevitable. Currently, the way that prescribing is used within different organizations, services and teams varies and it is unclear which setting is most appropriate for the different modes of prescribing. Future work should focus on the impact of mental health nurse prescribing on service delivery, as well as on service users, colleagues and nurses themselves.

A comparison of the clinical effectiveness and costs of mental health nurse supplementary prescribing and independent medical prescribing: a post-test control group study

BACKGROUND

Supplementary prescribing for mental health nurses was first introduced in the UK in 2003. Since then, a number of studies have reported stakeholders' perceptions of the success of the initiative. However, there has been little experimental research conducted into its effectiveness. This paper reports findings from the first known study to compare the cost and clinical impact of mental health nurse supplementary prescribing to independent medical prescribing.

METHODS

A post-test control group experimental design was used to compare the treatment costs, clinical outcomes and satisfaction of patients in receipt of mental health nurse supplementary prescribing with a matched group of patients in receipt of independent prescribing from consultant psychiatrists. The sample comprised 45 patients in receipt of mental health nurse supplementary prescribing for a minimum of six months and a matched group (by age, gender, diagnosis, and chronicity) of patients prescribed for by psychiatrists.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between patients in the nurse supplementary prescribers' group and the independent prescribers' group in terms of medication adherence, health status, side effects, and satisfaction with overall care. Total costs per patient for service use were 803 pounds higher for the nurse prescribers' group but this difference was not significant (95% confidence interval--1341 pounds to 3020 pounds).

CONCLUSIONS

No significant differences were found between the health and social outcomes of patients in the mental health nurse supplementary prescribers' group, and those prescribed for by the independent medical prescribers. The cost appraisal also showed that there was no significant difference in the costs of the two types of prescribing, although the pattern of resources used differed between patients in the two prescriber groups. The results suggest that mental health nurse supplementary prescribers can deliver similar health benefits to patients as consultant psychiatrists without any significant difference in patients' service utilisation costs.

Independent mental health nurse prescribing

Independent prescribing (IP) is a new form of prescriptive authority for mental health services. Very little is known about where IP is being implemented and factors to support or constrain its adoption. An opportunistic sample of 119 respondents made up of nurses, doctors, support workers, occupational therapists and social workers completed an online survey. The sample worked in adult, old age and substance misuse services. Hospital wards and community mental health teams were identified as the highest ranked areas for implementation. A total of 68% of the sample identified pharmacology as the area for further training. And 40% of the sample felt that IP had been introduced to make services more effective. This opportunistic sample supported IP as a means to offer greater patient choice and as a method to broaden the boundaries of nursing practice. Integral to this development is the link between the psychiatrist and IP nurse in terms of work allocation and supervision.

Survey of psychiatrists' views of nurse prescribing

For mental health nurses and service users to realize the benefits of non-medical prescribing, psychiatrists need to understand the remit of this role and be actively involved in influencing it. Although healthcare policy in the UK supports the expansion of non-medical prescribing, it requires much more for the successful implementation of such initiatives in practice. The aim of this survey was to explore the attitudes of all grades of psychiatrist working in two mental health trusts in the West Midlands to nurse prescribing. A specifically designed questionnaire was sent out to two groups of psychiatrists to assess their attitudes towards non-medical prescribing. Psychiatrists (n = 147) completed and returned a specifically designed questionnaire of their views. The more senior doctors appeared less concerned about nurse prescribing. Junior doctors expressed equivocation towards the role, suggesting that nurse prescribers be consistently supervised and have limited access to mental health drugs. The findings from this study have considerable implications for teams if junior doctors hold different views to their senior colleagues. Without the assistance of trusts in facilitating role change, the introduction of new roles could potentially heighten conflict between professions.

Views on nurse prescribing: a survey of community mental health nurses in the Republic of Ireland

A nurse prescribing scheme has recently been implemented within the Republic of Ireland. This paper reports on the views of community mental health nurses on nurse prescribing just prior to the implementation of the scheme. Data were gathered through a 13-item questionnaire administered to 103 members of the Association of Community Mental Health Nurses in Ireland. Results indicated a distinct difference of view between male and female community mental health nurses, with female nurses having greater reservations towards the desirability of nurse prescribing in relation to educational preparation and impact on professional relationships. Overall, only 17% of respondents favoured being supervised in their prescribing practice by their consultant psychiatrist. The paper concludes that there is ambivalence towards prescribing in this important group of nurses which may need to be taken into account if nurse prescribing is to be successfully implemented within the Irish mental health service context.

Prescribing by mental health nurses: the UK perspective

PURPOSE

This article aims to discuss the growth of mental health nurse (MHN) prescribing in the United Kingdom as an exemplar for readers to compare progress in their own countries and context. This study also aims to provide a historical overview of this process in the United Kingdom where MHNs prescribe safely and competently.

CONCLUSIONS

Finally, evidence has shown that MHNs with prescriptive authority are competent when prescribing when compared to psychiatrists.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Despite organizational barriers and educational concerns, MHN prescribing is becoming embedded in the healthcare context in the United Kingdom.

Nurse and pharmacist supplementary prescribing in the UK—A thematic review of the literature

OBJECTIVES

Supplementary prescribing (SP) represents a recent development in non-medical prescribing in the UK, involving a tripartite agreement between independent medical prescriber, dependent prescriber and patient, enabling the dependent prescriber to prescribe in accordance with a patient-specific clinical management plan (CMP). The aim in this paper is to review, thematically, the literature on nurse and pharmacist SP, to inform further research, policy and education.

METHODS

A review of the nursing and pharmacy SP literature from 1997 to 2007 was undertaken using searches of electronic databases, grey literature and journal hand searches.

RESULTS

Nurses and pharmacists were positive about SP but the medical profession were more critical and lacked awareness/understanding, according to the identified literature. SP was identified in many clinical settings but implementation barriers emerged from the empirical and anecdotal literature, including funding problems, delays in practicing and obtaining prescription pads, encumbering clinical management plans and access to records. Empirical studies were often methodological weaknesses and under-evaluation of safety, economic analysis and patients' experiences were identified in empirical studies. There was a perception that nurse and pharmacist independent prescribing may supersede supplementary prescribing.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a need for additional research regarding SP and despite nurses' and pharmacists' enthusiasm, implementation issues, medical apathy and independent prescribing potentially undermine the success of SP.

Exploring independent nurse prescribing for mental health settings

The purpose of this study was to explore issues relating to the implementation of independent nurse prescribing (IP) in mental health settings. Nurse prescribing in mental health has been promoted through various policy documents and has been subject to extensive research enquiry. Independent nurse prescribing is the latest form of prescriptive authority although little is known about how it can be used in mental health settings. Focus groups were used to collect qualitative data. In total, 22 nurses and three psychiatrists joined one of five focus groups. A form of grounded theory was used to analyse the data. Three major findings will be discussed. The first theme related to how IP could support system redesign and new ways of working. The second theme revolved around the form of future training and competency requirements to support an IP role, and the third theme was about the types of setting and diagnostic restrictions that need to be considered for IP. Findings suggest an overall cautious view on IP for a range of clinical settings. Implications for practice include the impact on new roles for nurses and psychiatrists and how nurses can best be trained and supported to carry out IP safely.

Promotion of choice in the care of people with bipolar disorder: a mental health nursing perspective

Inpatient nurse prescribing is proving to be a useful mechanism by which patients can have their medicines prescribed. A case study is described that outlines how a nurse prescriber worked with a patient who had been diagnosed with bipolar disorder. Key issues that have arisen from this case study include the importance of multidisciplinary team working, informed medicines management interventions and the ability to work with patients to promote patient choice. The case study will draw out the difficulties in managing bipolar conditions but enable other nurse prescribers to adopt similar values in their prescribing practice.

Mental health nurse supplementary prescribing: experiences of mental health nurses, psychiatrists and patients

AIM

This paper is a report of a study to explore the views of patients, mental health nurses and psychiatrists involved in mental health nurse supplementary prescribing.

BACKGROUND

Medication prescribing by mental health nurses in the United Kingdom is controversial. However, the experience of mental health patients suggests that increasing prescribing capacity could be one strategy to provide a person-centred prescribing approach.

METHOD

A qualitative study was carried out in 2005. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 psychiatrists, 11 mental health nurses with prescribing authority, and 12 patients who had been prescribed psychiatric medication by a mental health nurse. Participants were interviewed about positive aspects of supplementary prescribing including the extent of it being evidence-based, person-centred and clinically focussed.

FINDINGS

Participants from all three groups had a positive reaction to nurse supplementary prescribing. Mental health nurse prescribing was viewed as evidence-based, person-centred and with an additional focus on physical health. Mental health nurses worked within their levels of competency. Barriers to the implementation of mental health nurse prescribing were nurses' lack of prescribing experience, shortfalls in supervision, insufficient focus on redesigning the service to support the role of the mental health nurse, and preparation for the role.

CONCLUSION

Mental health nurse prescribing seems potentially beneficial. However, more rigorous audit and evaluation are needed to confirm its safety, patient satisfaction and health outcomes. Mental health nurse prescribing will require service redesign to ensure that is becomes embedded in the service organizational culture.

How mental health nursing can best improve service users' experiences and outcomes in inpatient settings: responses to a national consultation

Despite a number of national developments in the past few years, concerns remain about the experience and outcomes for service users in inpatient care settings. As part of a national review of mental health nursing in England, a consultation exercise was carried out to ascertain the opinions of a wide range of stakeholders in order to inform subsequent recommendations. The consultation question specifically related to inpatient care was 'How can mental health nurses best improve service users' experiences, and outcomes, in inpatient care settings?' The consultation generated a total of 326 written responses, mostly from groups and organizations. Responses were subject to content analysis and the three largest categories were 'Service users influencing services' (n = 80, 31%), 'Service users involved in own care' (n = 74, 29%) and 'Direct clinical time' (n = 68, 26%), including respondents citing the need for protected therapeutic engagement time. Many of the themes raised in the consultation were subsequently reflected in the recommendations made in 'From values to action; the Chief Nursing Officer's review of mental health nursing'.

Implementing holistic practices in mental health nursing: A national consultation

BACKGROUND

A national consultation exercise was held as part of a review of mental health nursing in England.

OBJECTIVES

To gather views as to how best to develop mental health nursing to support a holistic approach to care, taking into account psychological, physical social and spiritual needs.

DESIGN

National open consultation by email over a 3-month period.

PARTICIPANTS

326 written replies were received. The largest group of responses was from National Health Service (NHS) organisations (n=92, 28.2%); 69.9% of responses were from groups or organisations (n=225).

METHODS

A consultation document was devised by a national reference group, including four questions relating to the development of practice in the four domains of: psychological, physical, social and spiritual care.

RESULTS

The majority of responses supported mental health nurses (MHNs) providing psychological therapies (n=271, 95.1%). To support this happening, responders most frequently described a need for appropriate specialist training post-registration (n=114). To improve physical well-being of service users, the most frequent suggestion was that MHNs should promote healthy lifestyles, e.g. by encouraging physical activity and advising on ways to reduce illicit drug, alcohol and tobacco use (n=152). Responders most frequently cited the need for MHNs to understand resources to support social inclusion (n=110), e.g. knowing how to access local resources, benefits, housing and employment advice. MHNs were most frequently seen as requiring appropriate training to help them support spiritual/religious needs (n=96).

CONCLUSIONS

The consultation was successful in obtaining views, in particular, of organisations and groups. These subsequently influenced national recommendations made by the Chief Nursing Officer's Review of Mental Health Nursing.