AICAFMHA:
promoting mental health for young Australians
Australian Infant, Child, Adolescent and Family Mental Health Association Ltd
ABN 87 093 479 022
Discussion List Topic:
Standardised criteria for intake into mental health services
Hi, Our team is in the process of developing a clearer set of criteria for admission to the service. We are a CAMHS in a regional/rural community setting and we have been struggling for years to clarify who we should and should not service. Are any of you using formal screening/intake assessment tools to guide your intake process? If so, can we have a copy to digest? Is anyone aware of some good summary/review articles on the range of criteria that should/could be used for this process? Also, we would be pleased to have a discussion, via email, with anyone who has gone down this path before. So please let us know. Thanks. |
| Submitted: Fri 4th Jan 2002 |
Alistair, A happy New Year to you and the distribution list. Of course, this does not lead to rational system design, but most places have a process and don't know how to make they're process more rational. I have a working hypothesis that effective intaker makes for better therapy, but my results won't be out until the end of 2003 as I am about to do some data collection. With Peter Brann from Maroondah CAMHS and their inntake coordinator Heather Willsher, I presented at the AICAFMHA conference IN BRISBANE IN 2001. There was a lot of interest in resdearching and re-designing intake systems and some sort of network established, although I have not heard from any of them apart from Peter since. If you wonder why this important step is so under researched, I believe, one needs to look at what happens in most walks of life. Teachers want to teach students the finer points of the more difficult tasks; so both academics and senior practitioners expend a lot of time on therapy and very little on the banal details of clinical practice. Also, intake has most often be done by the least likely professionals to publish (Nurses, Social Workers). The Maroondah research is directed at mapping the implicit criteria used by CAMHS intake workers in Victoria; so contact Peter Brann. Contact me directly and we could discuss more closely what you are after and why you think it might be available. cheers, |
| Submitted: Tues 8th Jan 2002 |
Hi there We at Southern CAMHS in Melbourne have reviewed intake practices and data gathering whilst we have not been able to come up with a new system we have designed a fantastic data base, anyone interested feel free to contact me on my contact number below Cheers |
| Submitted: Tues 8th Jan 2002 |
Craig, I am a senior psychologist in CAMHS in Brisbane. We are looking to putting a database together for routine collection of data. Id be interested in more details about your database, cheers, |
| Submitted: Wed 9th Jan 2002 |
Hi there paul, The data base that we designed front end id access data base, it is a fantastic program that we designed to all sorts of things. I sent a copy of it lat year to my mate Murise shearer at the Barrat she may give you a
demo, if not i have sent it with this email |
| Submitted: Wed 9th Jan 2002 |
Greetings, AICAFMHA colleagues I have been following the discussion about Intake criteria and processes for CAMHS. In my view, the question “What are the best criteria and processes for intake in CAMHS?” is now out of date. That is at least if by CAMHS people mean the traditional clinical service teams. If one establishes criteria for accepting families as clients of the service then there must be potential clients who do not meet the criteria. This then gives rise to the question of how the needs of these people are best addressed. Usually the answer has been that these extra-criteria cases are the responsibility of some other agencies, but rarely are the CAMHS criteria established with the agreement and cooperation of these other agencies. Instead of asking what should be the criteria for intake to the CAMHS, the current thinking would be to ask “what is the best design for providing Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services across the whole spectrum of activity for our (usually geographic) population?” The whole spectrum means everything from mental health education and promotion through universal programs through to selected and indicated strategies as well as the traditional activity of CAMHS teams of clinical interventions with the more severely disturbed end of the spectrum. In our Area, CAMHS teams are active across this whole spectrum, although the majority of their work remains at the clinical intervention end of the range. Various other agencies, government and non-government, also contribute at various points across the spectrum. Further, the question of whom it is appropriate for a CAMHS to have as clients, depends on which services are offered. Rather than providing every client with expert assessment as we used to do, we now have a range of responses to requests for help. These include sending printed materials at one end, through group programs and ongoing individual family assessment at the other. Consistent with the Second National Mental Health Plan, the above discussion could be summarised simply as saying that the clinic model of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service has been superseded by the population health model, although Child & Adolescent Mental Health clinic work continues as an important component of this. In this health service we have been implementing a population health model for Child and Adolescent Mental Health. If you would like a copy of the population plan that we are in the process of implementing, you are welcome to contact me. A/Prof Stewart L. Einfeld Director, Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Programs South East Health |
| Submitted: Fri 11th Jan 2002 |
|
Hi, This is a very interesting response. Primarily because it highlights for me the breadth of the task that is being created for CAMHS teams as a result of the National Mental Health Plans. Unfortunately, I think that the rhetoric of the National Mental Health Plan is not matched with financial resources. The reason that we as a team are seeking to clarify our criteria for delivery of services is because we are presently carrying out the diverse functions described by A/proff Einfeld as well as trying to meet an increasing demand for direct clinical care. Our team's core staffing has not changed in some 20 years and remains at 5 clinical fte's for a catchment population of between 135-150,000. I agree that services such as ours should develop service delivery plans in consultation with our consumer base. The problem that we face is the lack of community infrastructure for primary mental health care. The Raphael model of a population approach is a broad sweep that fundamentally fails to conceptualise the issue of providing specialist mental health care when there is no primary or secondary sector. It doesn't really matter how relevant, researched, or intellectually satisfying the model is if it doesn't accord with the political and financial realities that we are all facing. Ultimately, each service has to define it's role and function within a particular social and community context. Part of our context is that we are an under-resourced specialist service in a community with restricted acces to primary and secondary mental health care services. It is the tension between our dedication to the task of working for the young people in our community and our own stress at the burden of the workload which leaves us forever ambivalent about where we draw the line. Thanks to everyone for your responses as they are helping us to clarify the dilemma that we are working within and soothing some of the anxieties that we may have that we are either too 'wishy-washy' or too 'rigid'. I have always thought that to be a good CAMHS clinician you have to be good at coping with ambiguity because most of the issues that we deal with are wonderfully grey. |
| Submitted: Sat 12th Jan 2002 |
Back to Discussion List Index
Printable Version