Advertisement

The Conceptualization of Mental Health Service Quality Assessment: Consumer Perspective

  • Eric BaduEmail author
  • Anthony Paul O’Brien
  • Rebecca Mitchell
Original Article

Abstract

This review synthesises theoretical approaches and methodological considerations in mental health service quality assessment from consumers-perspective. We searched published articles from databases: EMBASE, MEDLINE, CIHNAL, Scopus, Web of Science, and PsycINFO. Of the 30 included papers, 16 contained instruments used to mental health quality assessment and 14 focused on theoretical constructs. The review finds that mental health quality assessment is explained and measured using constructs that focus on structure, process and outcome. The methodological issues that need critical consideration are the context and cultural norms of services, outcome perspectives, evaluator, sources of information as well as the selection of consumers and instruments. The review recommends that researchers and clinicians should consider the theoretical constructs and methodological issues in mental health quality assessment.

Keywords

Theoretical approaches Methodological issues Mental health service quality Assessment Consumers-perspective outcome 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the University of Newcastle Graduate Research Australia, for the Doctoral Scholarship offered to the lead author. The authors are also grateful for the support received from Debbie Booth, the Librarian for supporting the literature search.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interests

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Ahlfors, U. G., Lewander, T., Lindström, E., Malt, U. F., Lublin, H., & Malm, U. (2001). Assessment of patient satisfaction with psychiatric care: Development and clinical evaluation of a brief consumer satisfaction rating scale (UKU-ConSat). Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 55(sup44), 71–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amatulli, A., Azzone, P., & Srebnik, D. (2005). Monitoring the quality of an Italian public psychiatric service: A four dimensions study of the outcome. The European Journal of Psychiatry, 19(1), 5–18.  https://doi.org/10.4321/S0213-61632005000100001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arya, D., & Callaly, T. (2005). Using continuous quality improvement to implement a clinical governance framework in a mental health service. Australasian Psychiatry, 13(3), 241–246.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Attkisson, C. C., & Greenfield, T. K. (2004). The UCSF Client Satisfaction Scales: I. The Client Satisfaction Questionnaire-8. The use of psychological testing for treatment planning and outcomes assessment: Instruments for adults (3rd ed., Vol. 3, pp. 799–811). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.Google Scholar
  5. Birleson, P., Brann, P., & Smith, A. (2001). Using program theory to develop key performance indicators for child and adolescent mental health services. Australian Health Review: A Publication of the Australian Hospital Association, 24(1), 10–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boyer, L., Baumstarck-Barrau, K., Cano, N., Zendjidjian, X., Belzeaux, R., Limousin, S., … Auquier, P. (2009). Assessment of psychiatric inpatient satisfaction: A systematic review of self-reported instruments. European Psychiatry, 24(8), 540–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brannan, A. M., Sonnichsen, S. E., & Heflinger, C. A. (1996). Measuring satisfaction with children’s mental health services: Validity and reliability of the satisfaction scales. Evaluation and program planning, 19(2), 131–141.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0149-7189%2896%2900004-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ching, Y.-C. (2011). Translating and adapting mental health service outcome measurements for use in Taiwan. Journal of Nursing Research, 19(3), 190–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Donabedian, A. (2005). Evaluating the quality of medical care. The Milbank Quarterly, 83(4), 691–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Duckers, M. L., & Thormar, S. B. (2015). Post-disaster psychosocial support and quality improvement: A conceptual framework for understanding and improving the quality of psychosocial support programs. Nursing & Health Sciences, 17(2), 159–165.  https://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.12162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Funk, M., Lund, C., Freeman, M., & Drew, N. (2009). Improving the quality of mental health care. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 21(6), 415–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gaebel, W. (1997). Quality assurance in psychiatry: Concept and methods. European Psychiatry, 12, 79s–87s.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gigantesco, A., Morosini, P., & Bazzoni, A. (2003). Quality of psychiatric care: Validation of an instrument for measuring inpatient opinion. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 15(1), 73–078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Grabowski, D. C., Aschbrenner, K. A., Rome, V. F., & Bartels, S. J. (2010). Quality of mental health care for nursing home residents: A literature review. Medical Care Research & Review, 67(6), 627–656.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1077558710362538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hansson, L., & Höglund, E. (1995). Patient satisfaction with psychiatric services: The development, reliability, and validity of two patient-satisfaction questionnaires for use in inpatient and outpatient setting. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 49(4), 257–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Henderson, C., Hales, H., & Ruggeri, M. (2003). Cross-cultural differences in the conceptualisation of patients’ satisfaction with psychiatric services: Content validity of the english version of the verona service satisfaction scale. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 38(3), 142–148.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-003-0606-7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Hermann, R., & Mattke, S. (2004). Selecting indicators for the quality of mental health care at the health systems level in OECD countries. OECD Health Technical Papers, No. 17, OECD Publishing, Paris, France.Google Scholar
  19. Hopia, H., Latvala, E., & Liimatainen, L. (2016). Reviewing the methodology of an integrative review. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 30(4), 662–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ivarsson, B., & Malm, U. (2007). Self-reported consumer satisfaction in mental health services: Validation of a self-rating version of the UKU-consumer satisfaction rating scale. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 61(3), 194–200.  https://doi.org/10.1080/08039480701352488.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Kelley, E., & Hurst, J. (2006). Health care quality indicators project conceptual framework paper, OECD Health working papers, No. 23.Google Scholar
  22. Kilbourne, A. M., Beck, K., Spaeth-Rublee, B., Ramanuj, P., O’Brien, R. W., Tomoyasu, N., et al. (2018). Measuring and improving the quality of mental health care: A global perspective. World Psychiatry, 17(1), 30–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mayring, P. (2014). Qualitative content analysis: Theoretical foundation, basic procedures and software solution. Klagenfurt.Google Scholar
  24. McGrath, B. M., & Tempier, R. P. (2003). Implementing quality management in psychiatry: From theory to practice—shifting focus from process to outcome. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 48(7), 467–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McKay, R., Coombs, T., & Pirkis, J. (2012). A framework for exploring the potential of routine outcome measurement to improve mental health care. Australasian Psychiatry, 20(2), 127–133.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1039856212436621.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Miglietta, E., Belessiotis-Richards, C., Ruggeri, M., & Priebe, S. (2018). Scales for assessing patient satisfaction with mental health care: A systematic review. Journal of psychiatric research, 100, 33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & Group, P. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Montgomery, P., Rose, D., & Carter, L. (2009). Patient health outcomes in psychiatric mental health nursing. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 16(1), 32–45.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2850.2008.01327.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Pearson, A., White, H., Bath-Hextall, F., Apostolo, J., Salmond, S., & Kirkpatrick, P. (2014). Methodology for JBI mixed methods systematic reviews. The Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers Manual, 1, 5–34.Google Scholar
  30. Pellegrin, K. L., Stuart, G. W., Maree, B., Frueh, B. C., & Ballenger, J. C. (2001). A brief scale for assessing patients’ satisfaction with care in outpatient psychiatric services. Psychiatric Services, 52(6), 816–819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Reininghaus, U., & Priebe, S. (2012). Measuring patient-reported outcomes in psychosis: Conceptual and methodological review. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 201(4), 262–267.  https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.111.107615.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Ruggeri, M., Lasalvia, A., Salvi, G., Cristofalo, D., Bonetto, C., & Tansella, M. (2007). Applications and usefulness of routine measurement of patients’ satisfaction with community-based mental health care. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 116(SUPPL. 437), 53–65.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0447.2007.01093.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Salzer, M. S., Nixon, C. T., Schut, L. J., Karver, M. S., & Bickman, L. (1997). Validating quality indicators. Quality as the relationship between structure, process, and outcome. Evaluation Review, 21(3), 292–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schene, A. H., Koeter, M., van Wijngaarden, B., Knudsen, H. C., Leese, M., Ruggeri, M., et al. (2000). Methodology of a multi-site reliability study: EPSILON study 3. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 177(Suppl39), s15–s20.  https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.177.39.s15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Schroder, A., Larsson, B. W., & Ahlstrom, G. (2007). Quality in psychiatric care: An instrument evaluating patients’ expectations and experiences. International journal of health care quality assurance, 20(2), 141–160.  https://doi.org/10.1108/09526860710731834.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Sixma, H. J., Kerssens, J. J., Campen, C. V., & Peters, L. (1998). Quality of care from the patients’ perspective: From a theoretical concept to a new measuring instrument. Health Expectations, 1(2), 82–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Taube, M., & Berzina-Novikova, N. (2018). Improving the quality of psychiatric care in Latvia by measuring patient experiences. Health Policy, 122, 765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Thornicroft, G., & Slade, M. (2014). New trends in assessing the outcomes of mental health interventions. World Psychiatry, 13(2), 118–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. van Hasselt, F. M., Krabbe, P. F. M., Postma, M. J., & Loonen, A. J. M. (2015). Evaluation of health promotion programmes in severe mental illness: Theory and practice. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 24(1), 83–97.  https://doi.org/10.1002/mpr.1456.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Watkins, K. E., Keyser, D. J., Smith, B., Mannle, T. E., Kivlahan, D. R., Paddock, S. M., … Pincus, H. A. (2010). Transforming mental healthcare in the veterans health administration: A model for measuring performance to improve access, quality, and outcomes. Journal for Healthcare Quality, 32(6), 33-42; (quiz 42–33). https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1945-1474.2010.00109.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Whittemore, R., & Knafl, K. (2005). The integrative review: Updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52(5), 546–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. World Health Organization [WHO]. (2003). The mental health context. Geneva.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Nursing and MidwiferyThe University of NewcastleCallaghan, NewcastleAustralia
  2. 2.Faculty of Health and Medicine, School Nursing and MidwiferyUniversity of NewcastleCallaghan, NewcastleAustralia
  3. 3.Faculty of Business and EconomicsMacquarie UniversityNorth Ryde, SydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations