S20.01 - Attitudes of clinicians to routine outcome measurement in mental health

Abstract

Background and Aims:

Routine outcome measurement is mandated in public mental health services in Australia, but uptake and compliance is variable. This may be because of uncertainties and resistances among clinicians. The objective of this study was to survey attitudes and experiences to routine outcome measurement among staff in adult area mental health services and to understand their correlates.

Methods:

As part of a larger study, a specifically designed questionnaire was distributed to all staff.

Results:

The questionnaire return rate was high. A wide range of opinion was found, ranging from very positive to very negative, with the majority being somewhat positive. Staff who had attended training reported the measures as easier to use than those who had not. Staff who had recently seen feedback of their outcome measures rated outcome measures as more valuable but less easy to use than those who had not seen feedback. Compared to other disciplines, medical staff and psychologists tended to rate outcome measures as less useful. Administrative staff rated outcome measures as more valuable than did clinical staff.

Conclusions:

The results have implications for the implementation and sustainability of routine outcome measurement. It is helpful to distinguish between clinicians' views as to the general value of outcome measurement, which is often positive, and their experience of ease of use, which may be much less positive. The results highlight the need for staff to receive targeted training and usable reports, and to have access to resources to extract value from outcome measures.