Quality indicators for the referral process from primary to specialised mental health care: an explorative study in accordance with the RAND appropriateness method

Abstract

BackgroundCommunication between involved parties is essential to ensure coordinated and safe health care delivery. However, existing literature reveals that the information relayed in the referral process is seen as insufficient by the receivers. It is unknown how this insufficiency affects the quality of care, and valid performance measures to explore it are lacking. The aim of the present study was to develop quality indicators to detect the impact that the quality of referral letters from primary care to specialised mental health care has on the quality of mental health services.MethodsUsing a modified version of the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method, a systematic literature review and focus group interviews were conducted to define quality indicators for mental health care expected to be affected by the quality of referral information. Focus group participants included psychiatrists, psychologists, general practitioners, patient representatives and managers. The existing evidence and suggested indicators were presented to expert panels, who assessed the indicators by their validity, reliability, sensitivity and feasibility.ResultsSixteen preliminary indicators emerged during the focus group interviews and literature review. The expert panels recommended four of the 16 indicators. The recommended indicators measure a) timely access, b) delay in the process of assessing the referral, c) delay in the onset of care and d) the appropriateness of the referral. Adjustment was necessary for five other indicators, and seven indicators were rejected because of expected confounding factors reducing their validity and sensitivity.ConclusionsThe quality of information relayed in the referral process from primary care to specialised mental health care is expected to affect a wide range of dimensions defining high quality care. The expected importance of the referral process for ensuring ‘timely access’-one of the six aims of high-quality health care defined by the Institute of Medicine-is highlighted. Exploring the underlying mechanisms for the potential impact of referral information on patient outcomes is recommended to enhance quality of care.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01374035 (28 April 2011).

Treating body, treating mind: The experiences of people with psychotic disorders and their general practitioners – Findings from the Australian National Survey of High Impact Psychosis

“…Three quarters indicated they are prepared to take the key role in managing the psychiatric care of their patients if they are supported by the mental health services. Effective communication between all health service providers is critical, but previous research indicates that mental health specialists feel the referral information they receive from primary care is insufficient (Hartveit et al, 2017), while GPs feel it takes too long to receive feedback from the specialist (Vermeir et al, 2015); this is similar to the findings reported here. With the aim of improving patient outcomes, the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP) has published guidelines on best practice principles for effective communication between medical and mental health professionals (The General Practice Mental Health Standards Collaboration, 2016).…”

Implementing a National Electronic Referral Program: Qualitative Study

“…If the program had been better integrated within the wider quality improvement agenda in the HSE, a broader range of mandatory clinical or service targets could have been set, as was the case in the rollout of electronic referrals in Scotland [ 1 ]. Importantly, as described by participants, clinicians do not wish to work to “political targets.” Any additional targets set must be patient-centered to ensure that the learnings gained from the data are meaningful for various stakeholders [ 26 , 33 ].…”

Protocol for Development of the Indian Autism Screening Questionnaire: The Screening Version of the Indian Scale for Assessment of Autism

“…[11][12][13][14][15] The entire effort should result in immediate referral for an accurate diagnosis and multidisciplinary intervention. 16 Screening enables general physicians and other healthcare workers to evaluate possible cases in the population that need further clinical consideration. Efficient screening should be low cost as to time, cost, and healthcare budget, and effective as to increasing to the maximum sensitivity and specificity.…”