International Journal of Mental Health Nursing

Feature Article

Use and interpretation of routine outcome measures in forensic mental health

Corresponding Author

Gregg Shinkfield

Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Victorian Institute of Forensic Mental Health (Forensicare), Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Correspondence: Gregg Shinkfield, Victorian Institute of Forensic Mental Health, Locked Bag 10, Fairfield, Vic 3078, Australia. Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author

James Ogloff,

James Ogloff

Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Victorian Institute of Forensic Mental Health (Forensicare), Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Search for more papers by this author

Gregg Shinkfield,

Corresponding Author

Gregg Shinkfield

Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Victorian Institute of Forensic Mental Health (Forensicare), Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Correspondence: Gregg Shinkfield, Victorian Institute of Forensic Mental Health, Locked Bag 10, Fairfield, Vic 3078, Australia. Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author

James Ogloff,

James Ogloff

Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Victorian Institute of Forensic Mental Health (Forensicare), Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Search for more papers by this author

First published: 06 September 2014

https://doi.org/10.1111/inm.12092

Citations: 11

Gregg Shinkfield, BSc, MSc(Hons), PGDipClinPsych.

James Ogloff, BA, MA, JD, PhD.

Share a link

Email
Wechat
Bluesky

Abstract

The present study aimed to both pilot a method of monitoring mental health nurses' use of routine outcome measures (ROM) and to examine the precision of ratings made with these tools within a forensic mental health environment. The audit protocol used in the present study was found to be effective in evaluating both the accuracy with which nurses were able to interpret ROM items and their degree of adherence with local procedures for completing such instruments. Moreover, the results suggest that despite these ROM having been developed for use in general mental health settings, they could be interpreted and rated with an adequate degree of reliability by nurses in a forensic mental health context. However, difficulties were observed in the applicability of several components of these tools within a forensic environment. Recommendations for future research and implications for practice are discussed.

References

Australian Health Ministers (1993). National Mental Health Plan. Canberra: Commonwealth Department of Health and Family Services.
Google Scholar
Burgess, P. & Coombs, T. (2011). National Outcomes & Casemix Collection: Volume and Percentage Valid Clinical Ratings. Brisbane, Queensland: Australian Mental Health Outcomes and Classification Network.
Google Scholar
Burgess, P., Coombs, T., Dickson, R. & Pirkis, J. (2012). Achievements in mental health outcome measurement in Australia: Reflections on progress made by the Australian Mental Health Outcomes and Classification Network (AMHOCN). International Journal of Mental Health Systems, 6 (4), 1–12.
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
Burns, A., Beevor, A., Lelliott, P. et al. (1999). Health of the Nation Outcome Scales for elderly people (HoNOS 65+). Glossary for HoNOS65+ score sheet. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 174, 435–438.
10.1192/bjp.174.5.435
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37–46.
10.1177/001316446002000104
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
Department of Health and Ageing (2003). Mental Health National Outcomes and Casemix Collection: Technical Specification of State and Territory Reporting Requirements for the Outcomes and Casemix Components of ‘Agreed Data’. Version 1.50. Canberra: Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing.
Google Scholar
Dickens, G., Sugarman, P. & Walker, L. (2007). HoNOS-secure: A reliable outcome measure for users of secure and forensic mental health services. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 18, 507–514.
10.1080/14789940701492279
Web of Science® Google Scholar
Eisen, S. V., Dill, D. L. & Grob, M. C. (1994). Reliability and validity of a brief patient-report instrument for psychiatric outcome evaluation. Hospital and Community Psychiatry, 45 (3), 242–247.
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
Gowers, S. G., Harrington, R. C., Whitton, A. et al. (1999). Health of the Nation Outcome Scales for Children and Adolescents (HoNOSCA): Glossary for HoNOSCA score sheet. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 174, 428–431.
10.1192/bjp.174.5.428
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
Idaiani, S. (2011). Inter-rater reliability of Health of Nations Outcome Scale (HoNOS) among mental health nurses in Aceh. Health Science Journal of Indonesia, 2 (2), 53–57.
Google Scholar
Jacobs, R. (2009). Investigating Patient Outcome Measures in Mental Health. CHE research paper 48. York: University of York.
Google Scholar
Kennedy, H. G., O'Neill, C., Flynn, G. & Gill, P. (2010). Dangerousness, Understanding, Recovery and Urgency Manual (the DUNDRUM Quartet) V1.0.22. Dublin: Trinity College Dublin.
Google Scholar
Kessler, R. C., Barker, P. R., Colpe, L. J. et al. (2003). Screening for serious mental illness in the general population. Archives of General Psychiatry, 60 (2), 184–189.
10.1001/archpsyc.60.2.184
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
McColl, E., Jacoby, A. & Thomas, L. (2006). Observing exposures and outcomes concurrently: Reporting surveys or cross-sectional studies. In: T. A. Lang & M. Secic (Eds). How to Report Statistics in Medicine: Annotated Guidelines for Authors, Editors, and Reviewers, 2nd edn. (pp. 239–251). Philadelphia: American College of Physicians.
Google Scholar
Mullen, P. (2000). Forensic mental health. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 176, 307–311.
10.1192/bjp.176.4.307
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
Ogloff, J., Lemphers, A. & Dwyer, C. (2004). Dual diagnosis in an Australian forensic psychiatric hospital: Prevalence and implications for services. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 22, 543–562.
10.1002/bsl.604
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
Pirkis, J., Burgess, P., Coombs, T., Clarke, A., Jones-Ellis, D. & Dickson, R. (2005a). Routine Measurement of Outcomes in Australia's Public Sector Mental Health Services. Melbourne: The University of Melbourne.
Google Scholar
Pirkis, J., Burgess, P., Kirk, P., Dodson, S. & Coombs, T. (2005b). Review of Standardised Measures Used in the National Outcomes and Casemix Collection (NOCC). Sydney: NSW Institute of Psychiatry.
Google Scholar
Rosen, A., Hadzi-Pavlovic, D. & Parker, G. (1989). The Life Skills Profile: A measure assessing function and disability in schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 15 (2), 325–337.
10.1093/schbul/15.2.325
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
Shaw, J. (2002). Needs assessment for mentally disordered offenders is different. The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 13, 14–17.
10.1080/09585180210123249
Web of Science® Google Scholar
Shinkfield, G. & Ogloff, J. (2014). A review and analysis of routine outcome measures for forensic mental health services. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 13, 1–20.
10.1080/14999013.2014.939788
Web of Science® Google Scholar
Sugarman, P. & Walker, L. (2007). Health of the Nation Outcome Scales for Users of Secure/Forensic Services (version 2b). [Cited 30 March 2014]. Available from: URL: http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/researchandtrainingunit/honos/secure.aspx
Google Scholar
T. Trauer (Ed.) (2010). Outcome Measurement in Mental Health: Theory and Practice. Cambridge: University Press.
10.1017/CBO9780511760686
Google Scholar
Turner, T. & Salter, M. (2008). Forensic psychiatry and general psychiatry: Re-examining the relationship. Psychiatric Bulletin, 32, 2–6.
10.1192/pb.bp.106.009332
Google Scholar
Velligan, D. I., Lopez, L., Castillo, D. A., Manaugh, B., Milam, A. C. & Miller, A. L. (2011). Interrater reliability of using brief standardized outcome measures in a community mental health setting. Psychiatric Services, 62 (5), 558–560.
10.1176/ps.62.5.pss6205_0558
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
Viera, A. J. & Garrett, J. M. (2005). Understanding interobserver agreement: The kappa statistic. Family Medicine, 37, 360–363.
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
Webster, J., Bretherton, F., Goulter, N. & Fawcett, L. (2013). Does an educational intervention improve the usefulness of the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales in an acute mental health setting? International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 22, 322–328.
10.1111/j.1447-0349.2012.00868.x
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
Wing, J. K., Beevor, A. S., Curtis, R. H., Park, S. B., Hadden, S. & Burns, A. (1998). Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS). Research and development. British Journal of Psychiatry, 172, 11–18.
10.1192/bjp.172.1.11
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar

Citing Literature

Volume24, Issue1

February 2015

Pages 11-18

Use and interpretation of routine outcome measures in forensic mental health

Abstract

References

Citing Literature

References

Information

About Wiley Online Library

Help & Support

Opportunities

Connect with Wiley

Use and interpretation of routine outcome measures in forensic mental health

Abstract

References

Citing Literature

References

Related

Information