Quality Indicators and Monitoring of Mental Health Services: What Do Frontline Providers Think?
- 1 January 2004
- journal article
- Published by American Psychiatric Association Publishing in American Journal of Psychiatry
- Vol. 161 (1), 146-153
- https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.161.1.146
Abstract
Many health care organizations are giving feedback to mental health care providers about their performance on quality indicators. Mental health care providers may be more likely to respond to this feedback if they believe the indicators are meaningful and within their "sphere of influence." The authors surveyed frontline mental health care providers to elicit their perceptions of widely used indicators for quality monitoring in mental health services. The survey was distributed to a stratified, random sample of 1,094 eligible mental health care providers at 52 Department of Veterans Affairs facilities; 684 (63%) returned the survey. The survey elicited perceptions of 21 widely used indicators in five quality domains (access, utilization, satisfaction, process, and outcomes). The data were analyzed with descriptive and multivariate methods. Most mental health care providers (65%) felt that feedback about these widely used indicators would be valuable in efforts to improve care; however, only 38% felt able to influence performance related to these monitors and just 13% were willing to accept incentives/risk for their performance. Providers were most positive about satisfaction monitors and preferentially included satisfaction, access, and process monitors in performance sets to measure overall quality. Despite providers' relatively positive views of monitors, 41% felt that monitoring programs did not assist them in improving care. Providers cited numerous barriers to improving care processes. Mental health care providers may be more receptive to monitoring efforts if satisfaction, access, and process monitors are emphasized. However, providers' views of monitoring programs appear to be less affected by concerns about specific monitors than by concerns about the accuracy of quality measurement and barriers to changing care processes.Keywords
This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Improving Quality Improvement Using Achievable Benchmarks For Physician FeedbackJAMA, 2001
- The Effect of Explicit Financial Incentives on Physician BehaviorArchives of Internal Medicine, 2001
- Response rates to mail surveys published in medical journalsJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1997
- Validating Quality Indicators for Hospital CareThe Joint Commission Journal on Quality Improvement, 1997
- Effect of physician profiling on utilizationJournal of General Internal Medicine, 1996
- The role of the therapeutic alliance in psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy outcome: Findings in the National Institute of Mental Health Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1996
- Changing physician performance. A systematic review of the effect of continuing medical education strategiesJAMA, 1995
- Beyond generic occurrence screeningPublished by American Medical Association (AMA) ,1991
- The case for using industrial quality management science in health care organizationsPublished by American Medical Association (AMA) ,1989
- Research assessing consumer satisfaction with mental health treatment: A review of findingsEvaluation and Program Planning, 1983