Optimising response rates in a national postal survey evaluating community mental health care: four interventions trialled

Abstract

Background

The Community Mental Health Survey (CMHS) is a valuable resource of information on experiences of mental health care in England; however, response rates are declining.

Aim

To increase the overall response rate and response rate of young adult service users.

Methods

Four interventions were trialled in a randomised controlled study design alongside the 2017 CMHS. The questionnaire and information letters were modified based on an established framework for influencing behaviour. The modified materials plus a pre-notification card were tested to increase the overall response rate, identified by one-sided z-tests between the intervention and control groups. An information flyer was modified to target service users age 18 to 35, tested using multilevel logistic regression.

Results

The overall response rate significantly increased with the modified information letters compared to the control (29.1% vs. 25.1%; p = 0.007). The targeted information flyer did not increase responses from younger service users; though the combination of modified information letters and questionnaire did (24.6% vs. 15.8%; p = 0.01).

Conclusions

Modifying information letters based on the easy, attractive, social and timely (EAST) framework can increase response rate in postal surveys evaluating community mental health care. Modified letters combined with a modified questionnaire can increase the response from younger service users.

Keywords:

• Community mental health
• patient-centred care
• service user feedback
• experiences of care
• evaluating mental health care
• response rates
• national surveys

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge the NHS trusts that volunteered to take part in this study and the survey teams at each of the ten trusts that drew the required sample. Finally, we would like to thank all the service users that took the time to complete the questionnaire and provide useful feedback on their care.

Disclosure statement

This work was supported by the Care Quality Commission under the NPSP delivery contract with Picker Institute Europe.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) under the NHS Patient Survey Programme (NPSP) delivery contract with Picker Institute Europe.