Routine outcome measurement in mental health service consumers: Who should provide support for the self-assessments?

Marc Gelkopf, Shira Pagorek-Eshel, Tom Trauer and David Roe

Evaluation and Program Planning, 2015, vol. 50, issue C, 43-46

Abstract: This study examined whether mental health community service users completed outcome self-reports differently when assessments were supervised by internal vs. external staff. The examination of potential differences between the two has useful implications for mental health systems that take upon themselves the challenge of Routine Outcome Measurement (ROM), as it might impact allocation of public resources and managed care program planning. 73 consumers completed the Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of Life (MANSA), a shortened version of the Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS), and a functioning questionnaire. Questionnaires were administered, once using support provided by internal staff and once using support provided by external professional staff, with a one-month time interval and in random order. A MANOVA Repeated Measures showed no differences in outcomes of quality of life and recovery between internal and external support. Functioning scores were higher for the internal support when the internal assessments were performed first. Overall, except for the differences in functioning assessment, outcome scores were not determined by the supporting agency. This might indicate that when measuring quality of life and recovery, different supporting methods can be used to gather outcome measures and internal staff might be a good default agency to do this. Differences found in functioning assessment are discussed.

Keywords: Mental health assessments; Outcome measurement; Mental health services; Assessment biases; Internal vs. external assessment (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2015
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718915000105
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:epplan:v:50:y:2015:i:c:p:43-46

DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2015.02.001

Access Statistics for this article

Evaluation and Program Planning is currently edited by Jonathan A. Morell

More articles in Evaluation and Program Planning from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().