Top

The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research

Published in:

Open Access 01-11-2022 | Original Research Article

What Matters for Evaluating the Quality of Mental Healthcare? Identifying Important Aspects in Qualitative Focus Groups with Service Users and Frontline Mental Health Professionals

Authors: Philip A. Powell, Donna Rowen

Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research | Issue 6/2022

Abstract

Background

Evaluating quality in mental healthcare is essential for ensuring a high-quality experience for service users (SUs). Policy-defined quality indicators, however, risk misalignment with the perspectives of SUs and mental healthcare professionals (MHPs). There is value in exploring how SUs and frontline MHPs think quality should be measured.

Objectives

Our study objectives were to: (1) identify aspects that SUs and MHPs deem important for assessing quality in mental healthcare to help support attribute selection in a subsequent discrete choice experiment and (2) explore similarities and differences between SU and MHPs’ views.

Methods

Semi-structured qualitative focus groups (n = 6) were conducted with SUs (n = 14) and MHPs (n = 8) recruited from a UK National Health Service Trust. A topic guide was generated from a review of UK policy documents and existing data used to measure quality in mental healthcare in England. Transcripts were analysed using a framework analysis.

Results

Twenty-one subthemes were identified, grouped within six themes: accessing mental healthcare; assessing the benefits of care; co-ordinated approach; delivering mental healthcare; individualised care; and role of the person providing care. Themes such as person-centred care, capacity and resources, and receiving the right type of care received more coverage than others. Service users and MHPs displayed high concordance in their views, with minor areas of divergence.

Conclusions

We developed a comprehensive six-theme framework for understanding quality in mental healthcare from the viewpoint of the SU and frontline MHP, which can be used to help inform the selection of a meaningful set of quality indicators in mental health for research and practice.

Available only for authorised users

World Health Organization. WHO report highlights global shortfall in investment in mental health. 2021. https://www.who.int/news/item/08-10-2021-who-report-highlights-global-shortfall-in-investment-in-mental-health. Accessed 6 Jan 2022.

NHS England and NHS Improvement. In: Delivering the five year forward view for mental health: developing quality and outcomes measures. London: NHS England and NHS Improvement; 2016.

England NHS, Improvement NHS. Linking quality and outcome measures to payment for mental health: technical guidance. London: NHS England and NHS Improvement; 2016.

Kilbourne AM, Beck K, Spaeth-Rublee B, Ramanuj P, O’Brien RW, Tomoyasu N, et al. Measuring and improving the quality of mental health care: a global perspective. World Psychiatry. 2018;17(1):30–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20482.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

England NHS. Achieving better access to mental health services by 2020. London: Department of Health; 2014.

Newman D, O’Reilly P, Lee SH, Kennedy C. Mental health service users’ experiences of mental health care: an integrative literature review. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2015;22(3):171–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpm.12202.CrossRefPubMed

Hopkins J, Loeb S, Fick D. Beyond satisfaction, what service users expect of inpatient mental health care: a literature review. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2009;16(10):927–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2850.2009.01501.x.CrossRefPubMed

Gilburt H, Rose D, Slade M. The importance of relationships in mental health care: a qualitative study of service users’ experiences of psychiatric hospital admission in the UK. BMC Health Serv Res. 2008;8(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-8-92.CrossRef

Staniszewska S, Mockford C, Chadburn G, Fenton S-J, Bhui K, Larkin M, et al. Experiences of in-patient mental health services: systematic review. Br J Psychiatry. 2019;214(6):329–38. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.2019.22.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Oedegaard CH, Davidson L, Stige B, Veseth M, Blindheim A, Garvik L, et al. “It means so much for me to have a choice”: a qualitative study providing first-person perspectives on medication-free treatment in mental health care. BMC Psychiatry. 2020;20(1):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-020-02770-2.CrossRef

11.

Jørgensen K, Rendtorff JD. Patient participation in mental health care: perspectives of healthcare professionals: an integrative review. Scand J Caring Sci. 2018;32(2):490–501. https://doi.org/10.1111/scs.12531.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Hartley S, Raphael J, Lovell K, Berry K. Effective nurse–patient relationships in mental health care: a systematic review of interventions to improve the therapeutic alliance. Int J Nurs Stud. 2020;102: 103490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.103490.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Bjønness S, Viksveen P, Johannessen JO, Storm M. User participation and shared decision-making in adolescent mental healthcare: a qualitative study of healthcare professionals’ perspectives. Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health. 2020;14(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13034-020-0310-3.CrossRef

14.

Klingemann J, Welbel M, Priebe S, Giacco D, Matanov A, Lorant V, et al. Personal continuity versus specialisation of care approaches in mental healthcare: experiences of patients and clinicians: results of the qualitative study in five European countries. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2020;55(2):205–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-019-01757-z.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Soekhai V, de Bekker-Grob EW, Ellis AR, Vass CM. Discrete choice experiments in health economics: past, present and future. Pharmacoeconomics. 2019;37(2):201–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-018-0734-216.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Willems D, Hiligsmann M, van der Zee HH, Sayed CJ, Evers SM. Identifying unmet care needs and important treatment attributes in the management of hidradenitis suppurativa: a qualitative interview study. Patient. 2022;15(2):207–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-021-00539-7.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Herman PM, Ingram M, Cunningham CE, Rimas H, Murrieta L, Schachter K, et al. A comparison of methods for capturing patient preferences for delivery of mental health services to low-income hispanics engaged in primary care. Patient. 2016;9(4):293–301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-015-0155-7.CrossRefPubMed

18.

McCarthy MC, De Abreu LR, McMillan LJ, Meshcheriakova E, Cao A, Gillam L. Finding out what matters in decision-making related to genomics and personalized medicine in pediatric oncology: developing attributes to include in a discrete choice experiment. Patient. 2020;13(3):347–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-020-00411-0.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Apantaku G, Aguiar M, Kaal KJ, McDonald PJ, Connolly MB, Hrincu V, et al. Understanding attributes that influence physician and caregiver decisions about neurotechnology for pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy: a formative qualitative study to support the development of a discrete choice experiment. Patient. 2022;15(2):219–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-021-00544-w.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Rowen D, Powell PA, Hole AR, Aragon M-J, Castelli A, Jacobs R. Valuing quality in mental healthcare: a discrete choice experiment eliciting preferences from mental healthcare service users, mental healthcare professionals and the general population. Soc Sci Med. 2022;301: 114885. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.114885.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Hollin IL, Craig BM, Coast J, Beusterien K, Vass C, DiSantostefano R, et al. Reporting formative qualitative research to support the development of quantitative preference study protocols and corresponding survey instruments: guidelines for authors and reviewers. Patient. 2020;13(1):121–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-019-00401-x.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Kiernan MD, Hill M. Framework analysis: a whole paradigm approach. Qual Res J. 2018;18(3):248–61. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ-D-17-00008.CrossRef

23.

Guest G, Namey E, McKenna K. How many focus groups are enough? Building an evidence base for nonprobability sample sizes. Field Methods. 2017;29(1):3–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X16639015.CrossRef

24.

Powell PA, Carlton J, Rowen D, Brazier JE. Producing a preference-based quality of life measure for people with Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a mixed-methods study protocol. BMJ Open. 2019;9(3): e023685. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023685.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Powell PA, Overton PG, Simpson J. The revolting self: an interpretative phenomenological analysis of the experience of self-disgust in females with depressive symptoms. J Clin Psychol. 2014;70(6):562–78. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22049.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Ritchie J, Spencer L. Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In: Bryman A, Burgess R, editors. Analysing qualitative data. London: Routledge; 1994. p. 173–94.CrossRef

27.

Gale NK, Heath G, Cameron E, Rashid S, Redwood S. Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013;13(1):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-117.CrossRef

28.

Biringer E, Hartveit M, Sundfør B, Ruud T, Borg M. Continuity of care as experienced by mental health service users: a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017;17(1):763. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2719-9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Nicaise P, Grard A, Leys M, Van Audenhove C, Lorant V. Key dimensions of collaboration quality in mental health care service networks. J Interprof Care. 2021;35(1):28–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2019.1709425.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Horgan A, O’Donovan M, Manning F, Doody R, Savage E, Dorrity C, et al. ‘Meet me where I am’: mental health service users’ perspectives on the desirable qualities of a mental health nurse. Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2021;30(1):136–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/inm.12768.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Rubin H, Rubin I. Analyzing coded data. In: Rubin H, Rubin I, editors. Qualitative interviewing: the art of hearing data. London: Sage; 2005. p. 224–45.CrossRef

32.

Isobel S, Wilson A, Gill K, Schelling K, Howe D. What is needed for trauma informed mental health services in Australia? Perspectives of clinicians and managers. Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2021;30(1):72–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/inm.12811.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Tee S, Özçetin YSÜ. Promoting positive perceptions and person centred care toward people with mental health problems using co-design with nursing students. Nurse Educ Today. 2016;44:116–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2016.05.024.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Slade M. Implementing shared decision making in routine mental health care. World Psychiatry. 2017;16(2):146–53. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20412.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

35.

Shattell MM, Starr SS, Thomas SP. ‘Take my hand, help me out’: Mental health service recipients’ experience of the therapeutic relationship. Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2007;16(4):274–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1447-0349.2007.00477.x.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Wittink MN, Cary M, TenHave T, Baron J, Gallo JJ. Towards patient-centered care for depression. Patient. 2010;3(3):145–57. https://doi.org/10.2165/11530660.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

37.

Smith V, Chouliara Z, Morris PG, Collin P, Power K, Yellowlees A, et al. The experience of specialist inpatient treatment for anorexia nervosa: a qualitative study from adult patients’ perspectives. J Health Psychol. 2016;21(1):16–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105313520336.CrossRefPubMed

Title: What Matters for Evaluating the Quality of Mental Healthcare? Identifying Important Aspects in Qualitative Focus Groups with Service Users and Frontline Mental Health Professionals
Authors: Philip A. Powell
Donna Rowen
Publication date: 01-11-2022
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research / Issue 6/2022
Print ISSN: 1178-1653
Electronic ISSN: 1178-1661
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-022-00580-0

Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Reserve your place

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin

Prof. Florian Limbourg

Prof. Anoop Chauhan

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 6/2022

Interpreting Within-Patient Changes on the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13

Patient-Centered Core Impact Sets: What They are and Why We Need Them

Development of an Item Bank to Assess Patient-Reported Outcomes: Signs, Symptoms, and Impacts of COVID-19

Methods to Summarize Discrete-Choice Experiments in a Systematic Review: A Scoping Review

Opportunities to Improve Long COVID Care: Implications from Semi-structured Interviews with Black Patients

Concerns about the Responsiveness of Generic Measures and the Search for a “Minimally” Important Change: Today’s PRO Red Herrings

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

At a glance: The STEP trials