Search results

Developing ‘patient‐centred’ health services has become a goal in many countries but little work has been done to identify what research is needed to support the development of such services within mental health. The aim of this study was to consult all relevant stakeholder groups to establish research priorities for developing ‘patient‐centred’ mental health services in the UK. More than 1,000 stakeholders were consulted, including service users, carers and mental health professionals. The consultation identified 12 thematic areas requiring further research. These should be prioritised if services are to become more centred on the needs and aspirations of the people who use them.

In this article we explore how inpatient mental health services in England and Wales are interpreting and responding to policy derived from Mainstreaming Gender and Women's Mental Health (DH, 2003) in relation to women's safety in inpatient settings. This article will outline the background to concerns about safety in mental health settings for women and drawing on relevant literature and on interviews with service managers, practitioners and users identify some current issues in improving safety for women in inpatient settings and in creating single sex provision. Our review suggests that whilst there are improvements in provision for women in inpatient settings, some women are still not being offered a real choice of a women‐only setting on admission to hospital, and that changing the culture that permits a lack of physical and relational safety for women presents real challenges. We will discuss some of the implications for future practice.

Recent guidelines suggest that cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) has a pivotal role to play in the treatment of common mental health problems (CMHPs). There is a danger that we simply ask for ‘more of the same’ instead of looking at all the current limitations preventing individuals from accessing appropriate help. Doing this leads us to aim for a more radical and innovative approach to the CMHPs. This paper suggests that progress in primary care mental health has been much more limited than mental health workers and, in particular, researchers often acknowledge. It looks at the major obstacles barring the way to the development of services that could meet the needs of the very large number of people in our communities with CMHPs.

A postal survey and semi‐structured interviews were under taken with mental health day centre staff in two regions of England, investigating whether criticisms levelled at buildings‐based day services are justifiable. The majority of respondents agreed with recommendations outlined in From Segregation to Inclusion (National Institute for Mental Health in England/Care Services Improvement Par tnership, 2006), believing that mental health services should ideally be based in community locations. Respondents believed that this would help to challenge stigma, facilitate community integration, and provide service users with more oppor tunities. However, concerns were expressed as to the availability of mainstream facilities and whether this approach would be suitable for all service users. Suggestions on how day services could be improved included having access to reliable sources of funding, relaxing access criteria, and having greater service user involvement.

Imprisonment for public protection (IPP) has been the subject of much attention and some controversy since its implementation in April 2005. High numbers of IPP prisoners, combined with a low release rate, have meant that IPP has had a significant impact on the prison population. This paper charts the genesis of IPP and its historical antecedents. It also explores IPP as an exemplar of the ‘rise of risk’ and focuses on its links to the ‘dangerous severe personality disorder’ pilots. It presents two hypotheses on the mental health implications of IPP.

Prisoners are supposed to receive health care that is equivalent to that provided in the community. There is a high prevalence of mental ill health in prisons, and prisoners tend to have complex needs. Prison mental health care has received only limited attention until recently. The impact of the new in ‐reach teams appears to have been positive, but primary mental health care is weak across the prison estate and the vast majority of prisoners with mental health problems still receive little or no service. The development of prison mental health care has not been evidence‐based and there has been no policy implementation guidance that compares to that provided for reforms in services for the wider community. There is no model for prison mental health care and the role of the prison mental health practitioner is not well defined, nor is the health care workforce prepared for the task.

This paper is an account of the discussions and recommendations by the exper t advisory panel on potential metrics and ‘sentinel indicators’ for improved outcomes in housing and mental health, as par t of an inter‐agency seminar called to advise on the development of metrics and measures for community mental health, for Fair Society, Healthy Lives: The Marmot Review (Marmot, 2010). The seminar covered all aspects of mental health in both its broadest and narrower senses.Much of the background material for these discussions, therefore, cuts across familiar knowledge silos between the fields of health and housing. Where it is necessary to elucidate the text, references are included to relevant research and policy frameworks that may be unfamiliar to the general reader. This paper is not, however, intended as a general literature review nor is it an evaluation of the available research. A paper on this subject will feature in a future issue of the Journal.1The conclusions from the panel discussion are presented in four main areas, reflecting the need to specify metrics across the wide‐ranging interface between housing and mental health, while still keeping the task manageable. Five current or potential health service metrics were proposed as having par ticular value as signal indicators. Two of these (relating to primary care prevention and public health) have no precision as yet, par tly as new services and approaches are still evolving. Among existing health datasets, the Mental Health Minimum Dataset (MHMDS) (NHS Information Centre, 2009a), SITuation REPor ts (SITREPS) (Department of Health, 2003), and the Summary Care Record data were singled out, though each is thought to need more work to improve the current data categories as well as data collection.One rather more fundamental point made was that the identifying, assessing and encouraging of effective inter‐sector par tnership work will be the key to tackling health inequalities. The use of other, non‐health services data therefore holds great potential for a better recognition both of needs and of outcomes in successful par tnership work, especially where this can be interpreted at local level. These wider comments are elaborated in the context of housing, but may be applicable to all effor ts to evidence and work with the social determinants and the social outcomes of mental health. For the future, a combination of well‐crafted nationally sanctioned metrics and the ‘soft intelligence’ of locally identified meaning may be most effective.Subsequent developments confirm the potential in cross‐sector development work, and indicate the potential for fur ther collaboration via the local performance framework. As policy frameworks continue to evolve rapidly, the ar ticle ends with a Codex, updating the relevant policy frameworks context since the seminar (in Spring 2009) and especially in the context of a new coalition government with aspirations to ar ticulate and promote public health in the context of the local performance framework and the ‘new localism’ agenda. This final section and comments therein are therefore entirely the responsibility of the author.

The costs associated with staffing acute mental health wards is the largest expenditure in the inpatient budget. Exploring skill mix and its impact on outcomes, particularly service user outcomes should be of interest to all stakeholders involved in the commissioning, delivery and receipt of acute mental health care. This paper describes the findings of a literature and practice review of initiatives undertaken to improve staffing and skill mix, and their impact on service user outcomes. The practice review was necessary due to the paucity of published research in this area. Both research and practice initiatives do not appear to be driven by service user need. This results in a restricted and service driven range of outcome measures being used. The paper concludes by proposing recommendations for future workforce development in acute mental health settings.

The purpose of this paper is to review some of the key mental health education and training developments of the last decade of immense change to the service system in England. This change was part and parcel of the Labour Government's mental health modernisation agenda.