Implementation of routine outcome measurement in child and adolescent mental health services in the United Kingdom: a critical perspective

The aim of this commentary is to provide an overview of clinical outcome measures that are currently recommended for use in UK Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS), focusing on measures that are applicable across a wide range of conditions with established validity and reliability, or innovative in their design. We also provide an overview of the barriers and drivers to the use of Routine Outcome Measurement (ROM) in clinical practice

The use of routine outcome measures in two child and adolescent mental health services: a completed audit cycle

Background: Routine outcome measurement (ROM) is important for assessing the clinical effectiveness of health services and for monitoring patient outcomes. Within Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) in the UK the adoption of ROM in CAMHS has been supported by both national and local initiatives (such as government strategies, local commissioning policy, and research). Methods: With the aim of assessing how these policies and initiatives may have influenced the uptake of ROM within two different CAMHS we report the findings of two case-note audits: a baseline audit conducted in January 2011 and a re-audit conducted two years later in December 2012-February 2013. Results: The findings show an increase in both the single and repeated use of outcome measures from the time of the original audit, with repeated use (baseline and follow-up) of the Health of the Nation Outcome Scale for Children and Adolescents (HoNOSCA) scale increasing from 10% to 50% of cases. Re-audited case-notes contained more combined use of different outcome measures, with greater consensus on which measures to use. Outcome measures that were applicable across a wide range of clinical conditions were more likely to be used than symptom-specific measures, and measures that were completed by the clinician were found more often than measures completed by the service user. Conclusions: The findings show a substantial improvement in the use of outcome measures within CAMHS. These increases in use were found across different service organisations which were subject to different types of local service priorities and drivers

What do general practitioners know about ADHD? Attitudes and knowledge among first-contact gatekeepers: systematic narrative review

Background: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a common childhood disorder with international prevalence estimates of 5 % in childhood, yet significant evidence exists that far fewer children receive ADHD services. In many countries, ADHD is assessed and diagnosed in specialist mental health or neuro-developmental paediatric clinics, to which referral by General (Family) Practitioners (GPs) is required. In such ‘gatekeeper’ settings, where GPs act as a filter to diagnosis and treatment, GPs may either not recognise potential ADHD cases, or may be reluctant to refer. This study systematically reviews the literature regarding GPs’ views of ADHD in such settings. Methods: A search of nine major databases was conducted, with wide search parameters; 3776 records were initially retrieved. Studies were included if they were from settings where GPs are typically gatekeepers to ADHD services; if they addressed GPs’ ADHD attitudes and knowledge; if methods were clearly described; and if results for GPs were reported separately from those of other health professionals. Results: Few studies specifically addressed GP attitudes to ADHD. Only 11 papers (10 studies), spanning 2000–2010, met inclusion criteria, predominantly from the UK, Europe and Australia. As studies varied methodologically, findings are reported as a thematic narrative, under the following themes: Recognition rate; ADHD controversy (medicalisation, stigma, labelling); Causes of ADHD; GPs and ADHD diagnosis; GPs and ADHD treatment; GP ADHD training and sources of information; and Age, sex differences in knowledge and attitudes. Conclusions: Across times and settings, GPs practising in first-contact gatekeeper settings had mixed and often unhelpful attitudes regarding the validity of ADHD as a construct, the role of medication and how parenting contributed to presentation. A paucity of training was identified, alongside a reluctance of GPs to become involved in shared care practice. If access to services is to be improved for possible ADHD cases, there needs to be a focused and collaborative approach to training

An international clinical study of ability and disability in ADHD using the WHO-ICF framework

This is the fourth and final study designed to develop International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF, and children and youth version, ICF-CY) core sets for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). To investigate aspects of functioning and environment of individuals with ADHD as documented by the ICF-CY in clinical practice settings. An international cross-sectional multi-centre study was applied, involving nine units from eight countries: Denmark, Germany, India, Italy, Portugal, Saudi Arabia, Sweden and Taiwan. Clinicians and clinical researchers rated the functioning level of 112 children, adolescents and adults with ADHD using the extended ICF-CY checklist version 2.1a. The ratings were based on a variety of information sources, such as medical records, medical history, clinical observations, clinical questionnaires, psychometric tests and structured interviews with participants and family members. In total, 113 ICF-CY categories were identified, of which 50 were related to the activities and participation, 33 to environmental factors and 30 to body functions. The clinical study also yielded strengths related to ADHD, which included temperament and personality functions and recreation and leisure. The study findings endorse the complex nature of ADHD, as evidenced by the many functional and contextual domains impacted in ADHD. ICF-CY based tools can serve as foundation for capturing various functional profiles and environmental facilitators and barriers. The international nature of the ICF-CY makes it possible to develop user-friendly tools that can be applied globally and in multiple settings, ranging from clinical services and policy-making to education and research