Managing outcome performance in mental health using HoNOS: experience at St Andrew's Healthcare

Exploring the relation between clinician ratings and patient-reported experience and outcomes

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are increasingly recognized as important ways for patients to be more actively involved in their treatment and enhance shared decision-making.

OBJECTIVE

The current study investigated the associations between PROMs, PREMs and various symptoms measures reported by clinicians and psychiatric patients.

METHOD

One hundred and twenty people admitted to a psychiatric hospital completed two PREMs, one PROM (the shortened version of the Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of Life scale) and Effects of Symptoms on Daily Functioning (the Sheehan Disability Scale), the Patient Clinical Global Impression and the Modified Colorado Symptom Index. Their psychiatrists rated them using the Global Assessment of Functioning scale, the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales and the Therapist Clinical Global Impression.

RESULTS

There was a strong correlation between patient's evaluation of their quality of life (PROM), experience of their care (PREM) and the overall severity of their condition and their progress. The pattern of correlation between patients' and clinicians' measures revealed a three-layer structure representing a continuum from inner experience to external presentation of experiences.

CONCLUSION

Together these findings help identify and emphasize various domains of subjective experiences and their relation to external ratings.

Patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) and provider assessment in mental health: a systematic review of the context of implementation

Purpose

To review and integrate the vast amount of literature yielded by recent growing interest in patient-reported outcome measurement and routine outcome measures (PROMs/ROMs), in order to suggest options and improvements for implementation. PROMs are the systematic assessment of service users’ health using standardized self-report measures. Specifically, for ROMs, it includes routine provider or caretaker assessment measures. Both are administered to ascertain routinely, the impact of treatment in mental health settings and to improve care. A review is needed because of the large differences in setting, conceptualization, practice and implementation. Here, we examine the different major projects worldwide.

Data sources

Psych INFO and PubMed including Medline, Biomed Central, EMBASE Psychiatry and Elsevier Science’s Direct.

Study selection

We conducted a systematized review of the literature published from 2000 to 2018 on the implementation and sustainability of PROMs and ROMs in mental health services for adults.

Data extraction, synthesis and Results

We described and characterized the programs in different countries worldwide. We identified 103 articles that met the inclusion criteria, representing over 80 PROMs/ROMs initiatives in 15 countries. National policy and structure of mental health services were found to be major factors in implementation. We discuss the great variability in PROMs/ROMs models in different countries, making suggestions for their streamlining and improvement.

Conclusion

We extracted valuable information on the different characteristics of the numerous PROMs/ROMs initiatives worldwide. However, in the absence of a strong nationwide policy effort and support, implementation seems scattered and irregular. Thus, development of the implementation of PROMs/ROMs is left to groups of enthusiastic clinicians and researchers, making sustainability problematic.

Patient characteristics and outcome measurement in a low secure forensic hospital

BACKGROUND

Health services are increasingly required to measure outcomes after treatment, which can be reported to the funding body and may be scrutinised by the public. Extensive high-quality measurements are time consuming. Routinely collected clinical data might, if anonymised, provide good enough evidence of useful change consequent on service received.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Do the Health of the Nation Scale and the 20-item Historical, Clinical, Risk structured professional judgement tool scores provide evidence of clinical and risk change among low security hospital patients at 6 and 12 months after admission?

METHODS

One hundred and eight men were either resident on the unit on 1 January 2011 or new admissions to the census date of 31 May 2013. Their routinely collected data were added to an outcome register following each patient's Care Programme Approach clinical review meeting and analysed using repeated measures t-tests with Bonferroni corrections.

RESULTS

Most of the men, mean age 34.3 years, were single (93%), White British (71%) and with a primary diagnosis of schizophrenia (62%). There were significant reductions in the 11-item Health of the Nation Scale (excluding the community living condition scale) scores between baseline and 6 months and between 6 and 12 months, but no change on its additional 7-item secure subscale. Individual effect sizes indicated that 39% of the men had better social function, although 18% had deteriorated at 6 months. There was little overall change in the 20-item Historical, Clinical, Risk; individual effect sizes indicated that 11 men (15%) were rated as being at lower risk level and 10 (14%) at higher after 6 months in the study.

CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE

Standard clinical measures are promising as indicators of change in low security hospital patients. Risk ratings may be conservative, but at this stage of a secure hospital admission, higher scores may be as likely to indicate progress in identifying and quantifying risks as apparent increase in risk. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Validation aspects of the health of the nation outcome scales

Background

The purpose of the current study was the psychometric evaluation of the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS), an instrument developed to meet the necessity of a clinically acceptable outcome scale for routine use in mental illness services.

Methods

The study participants included 2,162 outpatients and residential inpatients (rated on the HoNOS on three occasions during the year 2000) with a range of mental illnesses in different diagnostic groups from ten Mental Health Departments, located in the area of Milan (Italy). Principal Component Analysis, Confirmatory Factor Analysis, Discriminant Analysis and Partial Credit Rasch Model were used to assess two sources of validity: the internal structure and the relationships with other variables.

Results

The results of the 12-item HoNOS demonstrate a significant departure from uni-dimensionality, confirmed by the Rasch analysis (which identified three misfitting items). However, HoNOS scores demonstrate stability and precision of item difficulties over time. Discriminant analysis showed that HoNOS scores have an acceptable level of discriminatory power in predicting the severity of patients' conditions (as represented by setting).

Conclusions

It was concluded that the Italian version of the HoNOS does not measure a single, underlying construct of mental health status. The internal structure validity analysis recommends a note of caution to use a summary index of the HoNOS scores, given the presence of multidimensionality and misfit. Nonetheless, the finding that the instrument is more multidimensional than unidimensional does not preclude the use of the HoNOS as a clinically valid tool for routine outcome assessment. In fact, item scores have demonstrated sufficient reliability (over diagnostic groups and care settings) and high precision in time, indicating that HoNOS items can be utilized as valid measurement instruments in longitudinal analyses.