Management by geographical area or management specialised by disorder? A mixed-methods evaluation of the effects of an organisational intervention on secondary mental health care for common mental disorder release_wwq2omfvpng6ngryxmtg5om65m

by Alex D Tulloch, Bryony Soper, Anke Görzig, Sophie Pettit, Leonardo Koeser, Catherine Polling, Andrew Watson, Mizanur Khondoker, Diana Rose, Paul McCrone, André Tylee, Graham Thornicroft

Published in Health Services and Delivery Research by National Institute for Health Research.

2016   p1-114

Abstract

<jats:sec id="abs1-1"><jats:title>Background</jats:title>In 2010, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (SLaM) established a programme replacing the borough directorates responsible for adult mental health services with three Clinical Academic Groups (CAGs), each of which took on a subset of adult services straddling all four boroughs. Care pathways were also introduced. We studied the Mood Anxiety and Personality CAG, which took on assessment and treatment teams and psychotherapy services.</jats:sec><jats:sec id="abs1-2"><jats:title>Objectives</jats:title>We aimed (1) to understand the CAG programme using realistic evaluation and (2) to assess whether or not it led to changes in activity and health-care quality.</jats:sec><jats:sec id="abs1-3"><jats:title>Methods</jats:title>Qualitative analysis was based on interviews and project documents. Quantitative analyses were based on electronic patient records and compared care in community mental health teams (CMHTs) and psychotherapy teams before and after CAG implementation. Analyses of activity covered caseload, counts of new episodes, episode length and number of contacts per episode. We also looked at CMHT costs. Analyses of effectiveness covered processes (pharmacological and psychological treatment of depression in CMHTs) and outcomes (effect on the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales total score or the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation 10-item version total score). Analyses of safety examined the rates of self-harm among current or recent CMHT patients. Patient centredness was represented by waiting time.</jats:sec><jats:sec id="abs1-4"><jats:title>Results</jats:title>The first core component of SLaM's CAG programme was the CAG restructuring itself. The second was the promotion of care pathways; interpreted as 'high level pathways', these schematised processes of referral, assessment, treatment, reassessment and discharge, but abstracted from the details of treatment. The three mechanisms of the CAG restructuring were increasing oversight, making teams fit the template of team types defined for each CAG ('CAG compliance') and changing financial accounts by grouping services in new ways; these mechanisms resulted in further reconfigurations. The use of high-level pathways supported service redesign and performance management. In CMHTs and psychotherapy teams activity tended to decrease, but this was probably not because of the CAG programme. CMHT costs were largely unchanged. There was no evidence that the CAG programme altered effectiveness or safety. Effects on waiting times varied but these were reduced in some cases. Overall, therefore, the CAG programme appeared to have had few effects on quality. We attributed this to the limited effect of the programme on individual treatment.</jats:sec><jats:sec id="abs1-5"><jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title>SLaM's CAG programme had clear effects on service reconfiguration at team level, with high-level pathways changing the ways that managers conceptualised their work. However, our quantitative work indicated no clear effects on quality. Thinking about how to use care pathways in ways that complement 'high-level' pathways by supporting the delivery of evidence-based treatments is a strategy that could help SLaM and other providers. Future research should look at the genesis of organisational change and how this is altered through implementation; it should also look at the effectiveness of care pathways in mental health services.</jats:sec><jats:sec id="abs1-6"><jats:title>Funding</jats:title>The research was supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and was performed using infrastructure provided by the NIHR South London and Maudsley and Institute of Psychiatry Biomedical Research Centre.</jats:sec>
In application/xml+jats format

Archived Files and Locations

application/pdf  2.4 MB
file_bxtca4hgnnbfdngbaxr2amu32i
kclpure.kcl.ac.uk (web)
web.archive.org (webarchive)
application/pdf  2.4 MB
file_tyu545n4zrhtpe6bdwggg5x62a
kclpure.kcl.ac.uk (web)
web.archive.org (webarchive)
application/pdf  12.5 MB
file_weixptzyencm3jmkmx6pao3g7e
web.archive.org (webarchive)
www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk (web)
application/pdf  12.5 MB
file_emja5b35rbfyfn3cbe5zqdpxqi
web.archive.org (webarchive)
njl-admin.nihr.ac.uk (web)
application/pdf  12.5 MB
file_hp3grdk5bvbqdihx473r73mjim
web.archive.org (webarchive)
repository.uwl.ac.uk (web)
Read Archived PDF
Preserved and Accessible
Type  article-journal
Stage   published
Year   2016
Language   en ?
DOI  10.3310/hsdr04090
Wikidata  Q28066761
Container Metadata
Open Access Publication
In DOAJ
Not in Keepers Registry
ISSN-L:  2050-4349
Work Entity
access all versions, variants, and formats of this works (eg, pre-prints)
Catalog Record
Revision: 50bb94bc-fef5-4507-bbae-06e346ead7d8
API URL: JSON