Facilitators and barriers to implementing quality measurement in primary mental health care Systematic review

University of Calgary, Psychiatry, Foothills Hospital,1403 29th St NW, Calgary AB T2N 2T9
Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien (Impact Factor: 1.4). 12/2010; 56(12):1322-31.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE To identify facilitators and barriers to implementing quality measurement in primary mental healthcare as part of a large Canadian study (Continuous Enhancement of Quality Measurement) to identify and select key performances measures for quality improvement in primary mental health care.DATA SOURCES CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO were searched, using various terms that represented the main concepts, for articles published in English between 1996 and 2005.STUDY SELECTION In consultation with a health sciences research librarian, the initial list of identified references was reduced to 702 abstracts, which were assessed for relevance by 2 coders using predetermined selection criteria. Following a consensus process, 34 articles were selected for inclusion in the analysis. An additional 106 citations were identified in the references of these articles, 14 of which were deemed relevant to this study, for a total of 57 empirical articles identified for review. Most articles described implementation of health care innovations and clinical practice guidelines, 5 focused on quality indicators, and 1 examined mental health indicators.SYNTHESIS Content analysis of the 57 articles identified 7 common categories of facilitators and barriers for implementing innovations, guidelines, and quality indicators: indicator characteristics, promotional strategies,implementation strategies, resources, individual-level factors, organizational-level factors, and external factors.Implementation studies in which these factors were addressed were more likely to achieve successful outcomes.CONCLUSION The overlap in facilitators and barriers across implementation of mental health indicators, healthcare innovations, and practice guidelines is not surprising, as they are often related. The overlap strengthens the findings of the limited number of studies of quality indicators. The Continuous Enhancement of Quality Measurement process for identification and selection of indicators has attended to some of these issues by using a rigorous scientific approach and by engaging a range of stakeholders in selecting and prioritizing the indicators.

Download full-text


Available from: Tania Embree, Aug 14, 2015
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The main aim of this guidance of the European Psychiatric Association is to provide evidence-based recommendations on the quality of mental health services in Europe. The recommendations were derived from a systematic search of the best available evidence in the scientific literature, supplemented by information from documents retrieved upon reviewing the identified articles. While most recommendations could be based on empirical studies (although of varying quality), some had to be based on expert opinion alone, but were deemed necessary as well. Another limitation was that the wide variety of service models and service traditions for the mentally ill worldwide often made generalisations difficult. In spite of these limitations, we arrived at 30 recommendations covering structure, process and outcome quality both on a generic and a setting-specific level. Operationalisations for each recommendation with measures to be considered as denominators and numerators are given as well to suggest quality indicators for future benchmarking across European countries. Further pan-European research will need to show whether the implementation of this guidance will lead to improved quality of mental healthcare, and may help to develop useful country-specific cutoffs for the suggested quality indicators.
    European Psychiatry 02/2012; 27(2):87-113. DOI:10.1016/j.eurpsy.2011.12.001 · 3.21 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Primary care serves as the cornerstone in a strong healthcare system. However, it has long been overlooked in the United States (USA), and an imbalance between specialty and primary care exists. The objective of this focused review paper is to identify research evidence on the value of primary care both in the USA and internationally, focusing on the importance of effective primary care services in delivering quality healthcare, improving health outcomes, and reducing disparities. Literature searches were performed in PubMed as well as "snowballing" based on the bibliographies of the retrieved articles. The areas reviewed included primary care definitions, primary care measurement, primary care practice, primary care and health, primary care and quality, primary care and cost, primary care and equity, primary care and health centers, and primary care and healthcare reform. In both developed and developing countries, primary care has been demonstrated to be associated with enhanced access to healthcare services, better health outcomes, and a decrease in hospitalization and use of emergency department visits. Primary care can also help counteract the negative impact of poor economic conditions on health.
    12/2012; 2012:432892. DOI:10.6064/2012/432892
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To improve clinic design, trial-and-error is commonly used to discover strategies that lead to improvement. Our goal was to predict the effects of various changes before undertaking them. Systems engineers collaborated with staff at an integrated primary care-mental health care clinic to create a computer simulation that mirrored how the clinic currently operates. We then simulated hypothetical changes to the staffing to understand their effects on percentage of patients seen outside scheduled clinic hours and service completion time. We found that, out of the change options being considered by the clinic, extending daily clinic hours by two and including an additional psychiatrist are likely to result in the greatest incremental decreases in patients seen outside clinic hours and in service time. Simulation in partnership with engineers can be an attractive tool for improving mental health clinics, particularly when changes are costly and thus trial-and-error is not desirable.
    General hospital psychiatry 07/2013; 35(6). DOI:10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2013.06.004 · 2.90 Impact Factor
Show more