4.2 Article

Improving mental health outcomes: achieving equity through quality improvement

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/intqhc/mzu005

关键词

quality improvement; mental health; public health; inequalities; outcome assessment (health care)

资金

  1. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) for Northwest London
  2. Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust
  3. Imperial College London

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To investigate equity of patient outcomes in a psychological therapy service, following increased access achieved by a quality improvement (QI) initiative. Retrospective service evaluation of health outcomes; data analysed by ANOVA, chi-squared and Statistical Process Control. A psychological therapy service in Westminster, London, UK. People living in the Borough of Westminster, London, attending the service (from either healthcare professional or self-referral) between February 2009 and May 2012. Social marketing interventions were used to increase referrals, including the promotion of the service through local media and through existing social networks. (i) Severity of depression on entry using Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ9). (ii) Changes to severity of depression following treatment (PHQ9). (iii) Changes in attainment of a meaningful improvement in condition assessed by a key performance indicator. Patients from areas of high deprivation entered the service with more severe depression (M 15.47, SD 6.75), compared with patients from areas of low (M 13.20, SD 6.75) and medium (M 14.44, SD 6.64) deprivation. Patients in low, medium and high deprivation areas attained similar changes in depression score (PHQ9: M 6.60, SD 6.41). Similar proportions of patients achieved the key performance indicator across initiative phase and deprivation categories. QI methods improved access to mental health services; this paper finds no evidence for differences in clinical outcomes in patients, regardless of level of deprivation, interpreted as no evidence of inequity in the service with respect to this outcome.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据