Abstract
Background:
The pressure on Dutch mental health care (MHC) brought about a transition to mental health centers (MCs) situated in neighborhoods, aligned with centers of expertise, aiming to improve accessibility of MHC for citizens. The development and implementation of MCs were evaluated, using insights from action research and guided by the value-based health care model Quadruple Aim.
Methods:
The MCs were developed and evaluated, using iterative learning cycles and guided by four domains of Quadruple Aim i.e. population health, experiences of citizens/clients and professionals, and impact on costs.
Results:
Citizens who have had an exploratory meeting in a MC are generally positive and 29% do not need MHC. If care is needed, they need fewer intake interviews. At the end of treatment in a MC, 91% of the clients are satisfied with shared decision making. The average level of recovery has an effect size of 0.56. The total waiting time to start treatment has not yet decreased. Although for professionals, the transition requires a lot of pioneering, it also gives them professional space, energy and job satisfaction.
Conclusion:
Monitoring and learning from Action Research cycles guided by quadruple aim supports the transition process. The transition to MCs, contributes positively to delivering appropriate care. Further research is needed to get insight into long term and regional effects.
The pressure on Dutch mental health care (MHC) brought about a transition to mental health centers (MCs) situated in neighborhoods, aligned with centers of expertise, aiming to improve accessibility of MHC for citizens. The development and implementation of MCs were evaluated, using insights from action research and guided by the value-based health care model Quadruple Aim.
Methods:
The MCs were developed and evaluated, using iterative learning cycles and guided by four domains of Quadruple Aim i.e. population health, experiences of citizens/clients and professionals, and impact on costs.
Results:
Citizens who have had an exploratory meeting in a MC are generally positive and 29% do not need MHC. If care is needed, they need fewer intake interviews. At the end of treatment in a MC, 91% of the clients are satisfied with shared decision making. The average level of recovery has an effect size of 0.56. The total waiting time to start treatment has not yet decreased. Although for professionals, the transition requires a lot of pioneering, it also gives them professional space, energy and job satisfaction.
Conclusion:
Monitoring and learning from Action Research cycles guided by quadruple aim supports the transition process. The transition to MCs, contributes positively to delivering appropriate care. Further research is needed to get insight into long term and regional effects.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | Psychology |
| Volume | 15 |
| Issue number | 10 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2024 |
Keywords
- action research
- quadruple aim model
- mental health care
- value based health care
- vertical collaboration
- shared decision making