Comparing Choice and Partnership Approach assumptions to Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services in NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde

Abstract

The data allow for identification of inefficiencies within CAMHS and highlights how capacity can be increased, without increasing budgets, to meet a rising clinical demand. The results allow managers and clinicians to improve job planning to ensure more children and young people have quick access to services.

Introducing an innovative model of acute paediatric mental health and addictions care to paediatric emergency departments: a protocol for a multicentre prospective cohort study

“…CAPA is a system transformation model grounded in demand and capacity theory, 37 Lean, 38 39 and shared decision making 40 41 to identify inefficiencies in care and increase care capacity without increasing budgets to meet clinical demand. 42 In multiple countries, CAPA has reduced wait times to care, increased family engagement and service satisfaction, and reduced ED use. 41 43 44 This process uses full booking and referral systems to streamline schedules and enable clinics to provide 48 hours follow-up without having to increase resources.…”

Clinical change after the implementation of the Choice and Partnership Approach within an Australian Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service

“…The Choice and Partnership Approach (CAPA) model of practice was developed in the United Kingdom to enhance Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) by improving access to appropriate and timely client‐ and family‐focussed clinical care (York & Kingsbury, ), as well as streamlining and standardising service practice to increase overall efficiency (Fuggle et al., ; Wilson, Metcalfe, & McLeod, ). Although the response of CAMHS appears to be improved with the implementation of the CAPA process by reducing waiting lists (Chugg, ; Clarke & Emberly, ; Fuggle et al., ; Naughton, Basu, O'Dowd, Carroll, & Maybery, ; Robotham & James, ; Robotham, James, & Cyhlarova, ; York & Kingsbury, ), to date no research has examined routinely collected intake and discharge clinical outcomes after implementing this model.…”

“…The CAPA approach has three central aims: to provide service structure and effectiveness, to reduce waits for service intervention and to improve the referral pathway (Wilson et al., ). A study by Wilson et al.…”

“…A study by Wilson et al. () compared the CAPA model assumptions to the activity of an eight team CAMHS service utilising the CAPA approach. The study also evaluated whether the CAPA approach effectively enabled the CAMHS to respond to growing service demand.…”

“…The study found that the CAMHS teams in the study had 74% of young people proceeding from Choice appointments to Core Partnership treatment, with an average of 7.8 appointments, compared with the CAPA model assumption of 66% with an average of 7.5 appointments. The third CAPA assumption investigated and determined that the CAMHS had the ability to meet the demand on services, as per the CAPA assumption that weekly accepted referral numbers do not exceed the total full‐time equivalent clinical time (Wilson et al., ). Although this study determined that the service had clinical capacity to meet the demand on the CAMHS teams as per the CAPA assumptions, it did not evaluate clinical outcomes of the young people who received intervention.…”