Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-cf9d5c678-ljdsm Total loading time: 0.232 Render date: 2021-07-31T08:00:06.878Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

The Care Programme Approach: time for frank talking

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Tom Burns
Affiliation:
Pathfinder Mental Health NHS Trust Springfield Hospital 61 Glenburnie Road, London SW17 7DJ
Judy Leibowitz
Affiliation:
Pathfinder Mental Health NHS Trust Springfield Hospital 61 Glenburnie Road, London SW17 7DJ
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Care Programme Approach (CPA) was introduced as a cornerstone of the Government's mental health policy in 1992 (Kingdon, 1994). It was meant to clarify the complex issues surrounding the coordination of care for the severely mentally ill and to promote interprofessional communication and effective targeting of resources by community mental health teams (CMHTs). The Ritchie report into the care of Christopher Clunis (Ritchie, 1994) underlined the need for clarity about who has overall responsibility for coordination and review of the progress of care – the key worker. The report makes a compelling case for a clearly documented care plan with identified problems, therapeutic goals and an unambiguous statement of who is responsible for what and when. How, then, could this virtuous proposal generate conflict and bad feeling? And why is there relatively little debate about it in the professional press?

Type
Care Programme Approach
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © 1997 The Royal College of Psychiatrists

References

Burns, B. J. & Santos, A. B. (1995) Assertive community treatment: an update of randomized trials. Psychiatric Services, 46, 669675.Google ScholarPubMed
Burns, T. (1990) Community ward rounds. Health Trends, 22, 6263.Google ScholarPubMed
Curtis, J. L., Millman, E. J., Struening, E., et al (1992) Effect of case management on rehospitalisation and utilisation of ambulatory care services. Hospital and Community Psychiatry, 43, 895899.Google Scholar
Foster, H. D., Falkowski, W. & Rollings, J. (1991) A survey of patients' attitudes towards inpatient psychiatric ward rounds. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 37, 135140.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Franklin, J. L., Solovitz, B., Mason, M., et al (1994) An evaluation of case management. American Journal of Public Health, 77, 674678.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Griffiths, R. (1988) Community Care: Agenda for Action. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Hoult, J., Reynolds, I., Charbonneau-Powis, M., et al (1983) Psychiatric hospital versus community treatment: the results of a randomised trial. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 17, 160167.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Intagliata, J. (1982) Improving the quality of community care for the chronically mentally disabled: the role of case management. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 8, 655674.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kingdon, D. (1994) Care Programme Approach: Recent Government policy and legislation. Bulletin of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, 18, 6870.Google Scholar
Kosky, N. & Burns, T. (1995) Patient access to psychiatric records: experience in an in-patient unit. Psychiatric Bulletin, 19, 8790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lancet (1996) Care-management: a disastrous mistake. Editorial. Lancet, 345, 399401.Google Scholar
Marshall, M. (1995) Case management: a dubious practice. Under evaluated and ineffective, but now government policy. British Medical Journal, 312, 523524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, M., Lockwood, A. & Gath, D. (1995) Social services case-management for long-term mental disorders: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet, 345, 409412.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McLean, E. & Leibowitz, J. (1990) A community mental health team to serve revolving door patients: the Doddington Edward Wilson PEW) Mental Health Team 1984–1988. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 36, 172182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muijen, M., Marks, I. M., Connolly, J., et al (1992) The Daily Living Programme: preliminary comparison of community versus hospital-based treatment for the seriously mentally ill facing emergency admission. British Journal of Psychiatry, 160, 379384.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Muijen, M., Cooney, M., Strathdee, G., et al (1994) Community psychiatric nurse teams: intensive support versus generic care. British Journal of Psychiatry, 165, 211217.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ritchie, H. G. (1994) The Christopher Clunis Inquiry. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Solomon, P. (1992) The efficacy of case management services for severely mentally disabled clients. Community Mental Health Journal, 28, 163180.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stein, L. I. & Test, M. A. (1980) Alternative to mental hospital treatment. (1) Conceptual model, treatment program, and clinical evaluation. Archives of General Psychiatry, 37, 392397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyrer, P., Morgan, J., Van Horn, E., et al (1995) A randomised controlled study of close monitoring of vulnerable patients. Lancet, 345, 756759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.
You have Access
Open access
4
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

The Care Programme Approach: time for frank talking
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

The Care Programme Approach: time for frank talking
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

The Care Programme Approach: time for frank talking
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *