Reducing wait times and avoiding unnecessary use of high-cost mental health services through a Rapid Access and Stabilization Program: Protocol for a program evaluation study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Emergency psychiatric care, unplanned hospital admissions, and inpatient health care are the costliest forms of mental health care. According to Statistics Canada (2018), almost 18% (5.3 million) of Canadians reported needing mental health support. However, just above half of this figure (56.2%) have reported their needs were fully met. In light of this evidence there is a pressing need to provide accessible mental health services in flexible yet cost-effective ways. To further expand capacity and access to mental health care in the province, Nova Scotia Health has launched a novel mental health initiative for people in need of mental health care without requiring emergency department visits or hospitalization. This new service is referred to as the Rapid Access and Stabilization Program (RASP). Objective This study evaluates the effectiveness and impact of the RASP on high-cost health services utilization (e.g. ED visits, mobile crisis visits, and inpatient treatments) and related costs. It also assesses healthcare partners' (e.g. healthcare providers, policymakers, community leaders) perceptions and patient experiences and satisfaction with the program and identifies sociodemographic characteristics, psychological conditions, recovery, well-being, and risk measures in the assisted population. Method This is a hypothesis-driven program evaluation study that employs a mixed methods approach. A within-subject comparison (pre- and post- evaluation study) will examine health services utilization data from patients attending RASP, one year before and one year after their psychiatry assessment at the program. A controlled between-subject comparison (cohort study) will use historical data from a control population will examine whether possible changes in high-cost health services utilization are associated with the intervention (RASP). The primary analysis involves extracting secondary data from provincial information systems, electronic medical records, and regular self-reported clinical assessments. Additionally, a qualitative sub-study will examine patient experience and satisfaction, and examining health care partners' impressions. Results The results for the primary, secondary, and qualitative outcome measures to be available within 6 months of study completion. We expect that RASP evaluation findings will demonstrate a minimum 10% reduction in high-cost health services utilization and corresponding 10% cost savings, and also a reduction in the wait times for patient consultations with psychiatrists to less than 30 calendar days, in both within-subject and between-subject comparisons. In addition, we anticipate that patients, healthcare providers and healthcare partners would express high levels of satisfaction with the new service. Conclusion This study will demonstrate the results of the Mental Health and Addictions Program (MHAP) efforts to provide stepped-care, particularly community-based support, to individuals with mental illnesses. Results will provide new insights into a novel community-based approach to mental health service delivery and contribute to knowledge on how to implement mental health programs across varying contexts.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,070 | 0,052 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,008 | 0,008 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,006 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,006 | 0,008 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,060 | 0,011 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».