Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T20:52:01.683Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Communication between community mental health services and primary care

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 June 2014

Vincent IO Agyapong ,
Olorunfemi Ahmodu  and
Allys Guerandel
Vincent IO Agyapong
Affiliation:
Dept of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, University of Dublin, Trinity College and St Patrick's University Hospital, James's Street, Dublin 8, Ireland
Olorunfemi Ahmodu
Affiliation:
St Vincent's University Hospital, Dublin 4, Ireland
Allys Guerandel
Affiliation:
St Vincent's University Hospital, Dublin 4, Ireland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: This study aims to assess the rate of six monthly communications between specialised psychiatric services and primary care and to determine factors which predict such communication.

Methods: A retrospective review of the clinical records of all patients attending the relevant local psychiatric outpatient clinic was carried out by all members of the multidisciplinary team to identify patient demographic and clinical variables as well as to determine if there has been documentation of communication with primary care in the preceding six months. Letters were sent to the relevant primary care teams regarding progress on their patients in cases where it was identified that no communication had occurred in the preceding six months.

Results: A total of 145 patients' charts were reviewed. Of these, 53.3% of the patients were females and 46.7% were males. The mean age was 47.9 years (SD = 14). Patients' diagnoses included; depression (41%), bipolar affective disorder (6.7%), schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder (27.6%), anxiety disorders (6.7%), alcohol dependency syndrome (11%) and other disorders (7%). Overall, only 36% of patients' charts had a record of communication with primary care in the last six months. Only one variable, ‘changes made to the patents medication in the last six months’ was significantly associated with the likelihood that there had been communication with primary care with an odds ratio of 15 and a p-value of 0.00.

Conclusion: A six monthly review has a potential to improve the level of communication between specialised psychiatric services and primary care.

Keywords

Primary careCommunity mental health servicesCommunicationOutpatients
Type
Original papers
Information
Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine , Volume 28 , Issue 3 , September 2011 , pp. 134 - 137
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Strathdee, G. Psychiatrists in primary care: the general practitioner viewpoint. Fam Pract 1988; 5: 111–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Gask, L, Sibbald, B, Creed, F. Evaluating models of working at the interface between mental health services and primary care. Br J Psychiatry 1997 Jan; 170: 6–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Kates, N, Craven, M, Crustolo, AMet al.Integrating Mental Health Services Within Primary Care – A Canadian Program. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 1997; 19: 324–332.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. A Vision For Change – Report of the expert group on mental health policy. (Accessed on-line Oct 1, 2009 at www.dohc.ie/publications/pdf/vision_for_change.pdf?direct=1)Google Scholar
5.Betbeder-Matibet, L, Fidgant, Y. Where's common ground? A survey of hospitals, community health centres and divisions of general practice in Australia. Aust Fam Physician 2000; 29: 378–383.Google Scholar
6.Taylor, D, Chappell-Lawrence, J, Graham, I. Facsimile communication between emergency departments and GPs, and patient data confidentiality. Med J Aust 1997; 167: 575–578.Google ScholarPubMed
7.Cooper, J, Murphy, E, Jordan, R, Mackway-Jones, K. Communication between secondary and primary care following self-harm: are National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines being met? Ann Gen Psychiatry 2008 Oct 23; 7: 21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.McCauley, MD, Russell, V, Bedford, Det al.Assessment following deliberate self-harm: who are we seeing and are we following the guidelines? Ir J Psych Med 2001; 18(4): 116–119.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Jenkins, R, Strathdee, G. The Integration of Mental Health Care with Primary Care. Int J Law Psychiatry 2000 May-Aug; 23(3-4): 277–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Bindman, J, Johnson, S, Wright, Set al.Integration between primary and secondary services in the care of the severely mentally ill: Patients' and general practitioners' views. Br J Psychiatry 1997 Aug; 171: 169–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Byng, R, Norman, I, Redfern, S, Jones, R. Exposing the key functions of a complex intervention for shared care in mental health: case study of a process evaluation. BMC Health Serv Res 2008, 8: 274 doi:10.1186/1472-6963-8-274CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Gask, L. Overt and covert barriers to the integration of primary and specialist mental healthcare. Soc Sci Med 2005; 61: 1785–1794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar