12
Developing a G4 Public Mental Healthcare Monitor – Monitor Working Party – To measure is to know

Developing a G4 Public Mental Healthcare Monitor – Monitor Working Party – To measure is to know

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Developing a G4 Public Mental Healthcare Monitor – Monitor Working Party – To measure is to know

Developing a G4 Public Mental Healthcare Monitor

– Monitor Working Party –

To measure is to know

Page 2: Developing a G4 Public Mental Healthcare Monitor – Monitor Working Party – To measure is to know

Public Mental Healthcare Monitor

• Estimates of size • Risk profiles• Trends over time• Public Mental Health

Services

• Evaluations• Benchmarking• Indicators

04/11/23 2

Page 3: Developing a G4 Public Mental Healthcare Monitor – Monitor Working Party – To measure is to know

Starting Points

• Conceptual model• Quality characteristics• Strategy

─ Public mental healthcare ladder─ Centre for Disease Control─ Academic Collaborative Centres

11/04/23 3

Page 4: Developing a G4 Public Mental Healthcare Monitor – Monitor Working Party – To measure is to know

Conceptual model: Public mental healthcare ladder

Rungs Target group

0,1 Risk groups

2 Vulnerable in the community

3 Vulnerable in institutions

4 Vulnerable on the street

04/11/23 4

J. Wolf 2006

Page 5: Developing a G4 Public Mental Healthcare Monitor – Monitor Working Party – To measure is to know

Quality characteristics• Demand-driven• Uniformity in definitions• Origin of population• Quality indicators

1. Simplicity

2. Flexibility

3. Quality of the data

4. Representativeness

5. Acceptance

6. Sensitivity

7. Predictive value

8. Timeliness

5

Buehler JW. Surveillance. In: Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash TL. Modern epidemiology. 2008: 459-480.

Page 6: Developing a G4 Public Mental Healthcare Monitor – Monitor Working Party – To measure is to know

Strategy- Bottom up & top-down -

04/11/23 6

National

Regional

Local

Indicator

Monitor

Page 7: Developing a G4 Public Mental Healthcare Monitor – Monitor Working Party – To measure is to know

Rung 0, 1 Risk groups

04/11/23 7

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

Rotterdam The Hague Utrecht

Percentage socially excluded

Social exclusion index• Netherlands Institute for Social Research• Health survey

Page 8: Developing a G4 Public Mental Healthcare Monitor – Monitor Working Party – To measure is to know

00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Number of evictions in relation to total number of corporation homes

AmsterdamThe HagueRotterdam*Utrecht

04/11/23 8

Maas, M., Planije, M.P. (2010). Monitor Plan van Aanpak Maastschappelijke Opvang (Social Support Action Plan Monitor): Report 2009, Amsterdam, The Hague, Utrecht and Rotterdam. Utrecht: Trimbos Institute + User Working Party

Rung 2 Vulnerable in the community

Page 9: Developing a G4 Public Mental Healthcare Monitor – Monitor Working Party – To measure is to know

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

Amsterdam Rotterdam Den Haag Utrecht G4 Nat av Rest NL

aa

nta

l pe

r 1

000

inw

on

ers

Drug users* undergoing treatment / 1000 inhabitants aged 15+, 2010

Rung 3 Vulnerable in institutions

04/11/23 9

• Undergoing treatment for dependency on opiates or cocaine (injecting/smoking): source National Alcohol and Drugs Information System/Foundation for the Provision of Care Information• Municipal boundaries 2010: source Statistics Netherlands

Page 10: Developing a G4 Public Mental Healthcare Monitor – Monitor Working Party – To measure is to know

Rung 4 Vulnerable on the streets

04/11/23 10

Page 11: Developing a G4 Public Mental Healthcare Monitor – Monitor Working Party – To measure is to know

Collaboration

04/11/23 11

Socially Vulnerable Groups Monitor

Public Mental Healthcare Theme Group

Page 12: Developing a G4 Public Mental Healthcare Monitor – Monitor Working Party – To measure is to know

04/11/23 12