IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0264173.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

COMplex mental health PAThways (COMPAT) Study: A mixed methods study to inform an evidence-based service delivery model for people with complex needs: Study protocol

Author

Listed:
  • Pooja Saini
  • Antony Martin
  • Jason McIntyre
  • Anna Balmer
  • Sam Burton
  • Hana Roks
  • Laura Sambrook
  • Amrith Shetty
  • Rajan Nathan

Abstract

Background: Mental health services for adults, as they are currently configured, have been designed to provide predominantly community-based interventions. It has long been recognised that some patients have such significant clinical and/or risk needs that those needs cannot be adequately met within standard service delivery models, resulting in a pressing need to consider the best models for this group of people. This paper shares a protocol for a mixed methods study that aims to understand: the profile and history of service users described as having complex needs; the decision-making processes by clinicians that lead to complex needs categorisation; service users and carers experience of service use; and, associated economic impact. This protocol describes a comprehensive evaluation that aims to inform an evidence-based service delivery model for people with complex needs. Methods: We will use a mixed methods design, combining quantitative and qualitative methods using in-depth descriptive and inferential analysis of patient records, written medical notes and in-depth interviews with service users, carers, and clinicians. The study will include five components: (1) a quantitative description and analysis of the demographic clinical characteristics of the patient group; (2) an economic evaluation of alternative patient pathways; (3) semi-structured interviews about service user and carer experiences; (4) using data from components 1–3 to co-produce vignettes jointly with relevant stakeholders involved in the care of service users with complex mental health needs; and, (5) semi-structured interviews about clinical decision-making by clinicians in relation to this patient group, using the vignettes as example case studies. Discussion: The study’s key outcomes will be to: examine the resource use and cost-impact associated with alternative care pathways to the NHS and other sectors of the economy (including social care); explore patient health and non-health outcomes associated with alternative care pathways; and, gain an understanding of a complex service user group and how treatment decisions are made to inform consistent and person-centred future service delivery.

Suggested Citation

  • Pooja Saini & Antony Martin & Jason McIntyre & Anna Balmer & Sam Burton & Hana Roks & Laura Sambrook & Amrith Shetty & Rajan Nathan, 2022. "COMplex mental health PAThways (COMPAT) Study: A mixed methods study to inform an evidence-based service delivery model for people with complex needs: Study protocol," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(3), pages 1-14, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0264173
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0264173
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0264173
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0264173&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0264173?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0264173. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.