Use of a routine outcome measure in a consultation-liaison mental health service

REFERENCES

• Australian Health Ministers. National Mental Health Policy. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra 1992
   Google Scholar
• Trauer T, Coombs T, Eagar K. Training in routine mental health outcome assessment: the Victorian experience. Australian Health Review 2002; 25: 122–128
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• NSW Department of Health. Your guide to MH‐OAT. Clinician's Reference Guide to NSW Mental Health Outcomes and Assessment Training. NSW Department of Health, Sydney 2001
   Google Scholar
• Morris‐Yates A. The Strategic Planning Group for Private Psychiatric Services Data Collection and Analysis Working Group. A National Model for the Collection and Analysis of a Minimum Data Set with Outcome Measurement for Private, Hospital‐ based, Psychiatric Services. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra 2000
   Google Scholar
• Information Strategy Group Technical Drafting Group. National Outcomes and Casemix Collection. Technical Specification of State and Territory Reporting Requirements for the Outcomes and Casemix Components of ‘Agreed Data’ Under National Mental Health Information Development Funding Agreements. Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing, Canberra 2002
   Google Scholar
• Australian Health Ministers. Second National Mental Health Plan. Mental Health Branch, Commonwealth Department of Health and Family Services, Canberra 1998
   Google Scholar
• Smith GC. The future of consultation‐liaison psychiatry. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 2003; 37: 150–159
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKegney F, Beckhardt RM. Evaluative research in consultation‐liaison psychiatry: review of the literature: 1970–81. General Hospital Psychiatry 1982; 4: 197–218
   Google Scholar
• Popkin MK, Mackenzie TB, Callies AL. Consultation‐Liaison Outcome Evaluation System. I. Consultant‐consultee interaction. Archives of General Psychiatry 1983; 40: 215–219
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell WD, Thompson TL. Some methodological issues in consultation‐liaison psychiatry research. General Hospital Psychiatry 1985; 7: 66–72
   Google Scholar
• von Korff M, Katon W, Lin EH, Wagner EH. Evaluation of psychiatric consultation‐ liaison in primary care settings. General Hospital Psychiatry 1987; 9: 118–125
   Google Scholar
• Bower P, Gask L. The changing nature of consultation‐liaison in primary care: bridging the gap between research and practice. General Hospital Psychiatry 2002; 24: 63–70
   Google Scholar
• KPMG Consulting. Review of Consultation‐Liaison Psychiatry Services in Victorian Hospitals ‐ Final Report. KPMG Management Consultants, Victoria 1996
   Google Scholar
• Callaly T, Trauer T, Hantz P. HBL: HoNOS, BASIS‐32 and LSP16. Barwon Health, Geelong 2000, Computer Software
   Google Scholar
• Wing JK, Beevor AS, Curtis RH, Park SBG, Hadden S, Burns A. Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS). British Journal of Psychiatry 1998; 172: 11–18
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trauer T, Callaly T, Little J, Shields R, Smith J. Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS): results of the Victorian field trial. British Journal of Psychiatry 1999; 174: 380–388
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. The ICD‐10 Classification of Mental and Behavioural Disorders. World Health Organization, Geneva 1993
   Google Scholar
• Smith GC. From consultation‐liaison psychiatry to psychosocial advocacy: main‐ taining psychiatry's scope. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 1998; 32: 753–761
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharrock J, Happell B. The psychiatric consultation‐liaison nurse: thriving in a general hospital setting. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing 2002; 11: 24–33
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Keul TJ, Popkin MK, Mackenzie TB, Callies AL. Self‐monitoring of consultation outcomes. Psychiatric Medicine 1983; 1: 345–351
   Google Scholar