Overt and covert barriers to the integration of primary and specialist mental health care
This paper is concerned with the historical attempt over the last 20 years to improve integration between primary and specialist mental health care. Semi-structured interviews were carried out during the period December 2000-March 2001 with primary care workers, specialist medical and nursing staff, managers and other key informants in one large group model Health Maintenance Organization in the USA. Both overt (financial) and covert (attitudinal and conceptual) barriers to the integration of mental health and primary care were identified and the impact of these barriers on organizational development is discussed with reference to Activity Theory. The nature and quality of interprofessional conversation in an organization may be important mediating factors in addressing covert barriers to integration between primary and specialist mental health services. There may be insufficient actual contact between different groups of workers in primary and specialist care to enable these professionals to share ideas, challenge mutual assumptions and understand each others' viewpoints about the nature of their work, the covert barriers to integration. Workers may differ in the conceptual models of mental health care they utilize, their views about access to services, and the amount of information they require. In order to integrate services effectively, these issues will require discussion. Financial pressures in the system may lead to failure on the part of management to sanction and encourage opportunities for interprofessional conversation and the geographical distance between places of work may also limit opportunities for contact. However, an alternative explanation might be that attitudinal and other covert barriers to integration effectively prevent, in the first place, the development of such a shared space in which these covert barriers might actually be addressed.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 61 (2005)
Issue (Month): 8 (October)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:61:y:2005:i:8:p:1785-1794. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.