Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explore the challenges that are experienced by staff responsible for commissioning liaison psychiatry services and to establish if these are shared by other health professionals.

Using a mixed-methods design, the findings from a mental health commissioner workshop (n = 12) were used to construct a survey that was distributed to health care professionals using an opportunistic framework (n = 98).

Four key themes emerged from the workshop, which was tested using the survey. The importance of secure funding; a better understanding of health care systems and pathways; partnership working and co-production and; access to mental health clinical information in general hospitals. There was broad convergence between commissioners, mental health clinicians and managers, except in relation to gathering and sharing of data. This suggests that poor communication between professionals is of concern.

There were a small number of survey respondents (n = 98). The sampling used an opportunistic framework that targeted commissioner and clinician forums. Using an opportunistic framework, the sample may not be representative. Additionally, multiple pairwise comparisons were conducted during the analysis of the survey responses, increasing the risk that significant results were found by chance.

A number of steps were identified that could be applied in practice. These mainly related to the importance of collecting and communicating data and co-production with commissioners in the design, development and monitoring of liaison psychiatry services.

This is the first study that has specifically considered the challenges associated with the commissioning of liaison psychiatry services.

New psychoactive substance (NPS) use in mental health and addiction health-care services is a common co-morbidity. This paper aims to explore the survey responses with health-care professional’s (HCPs) engagements and experiences towards people who use NPS in five health-care services.

A theoretically adapted online survey design explored the engagements and experiences of participants towards people who use NPS across (n = 3) community and (n = 2) rehabilitation mental health and addiction health-care services consisting of (n = 1,027) service users.

A total of 92 participants (of 120 participants) completed the survey and 28 did not. Most (56.33%) reported neutral to poor experiences and engagements and a lack of NPS-related policies, procedures and educational training. Participants (99%) recognised the harmful effects of NPSs and (87%) requested clinical assessment procedures. The participants are unable to identify and manage acute intoxication by NPS, lack knowledge of NPS adverse effects and requested NPS-specific training on drug legislation.

The sample may not be representative with the broader UK population. The study’s methods are comparable to similar research surrounding NPS in health-care services. Similar studies may advance the findings.

The implications for practice include NPS awareness trainings, educational updates through seminars and conferences. Participants requested clearer NPS assessment, referral and management processes. Several policy-making and procedural opportunities exist to ensure a better health outcome for people who use NPS.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first theoretically adapted survey to explore participant’s engagements and experiences with people who use NPS in addiction and mental health settings.