Use of CORE-OM as a benchmarking tool for patient outcomes at Counselling Psychology Units in Malaysian government hospitals / Norainee Kamaruddin
The study aimed to use an alternative method of assessing client outcomes, and service performance by using the outcome measure—Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (CORE-OM). Presently, the counselling psychology unit assesses the clients' outcomes by subjective observations and clients&...
Saved in:
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Thesis |
Published: |
2020
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://studentsrepo.um.edu.my/14698/1/Norainee.pdf http://studentsrepo.um.edu.my/14698/2/Norainee.pdf http://studentsrepo.um.edu.my/14698/ |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | The study aimed to use an alternative method of assessing client outcomes, and service
performance by using the outcome measure—Clinical Outcomes in Routine
Evaluation (CORE-OM). Presently, the counselling psychology unit assesses the
clients' outcomes by subjective observations and clients' self-reports. As for service
performance, the counselling psychology units are assessed internally by each
hospital's management system. In advanced countries, these methods have been
replaced or augmented by standardised routine outcome measures. This study used
CORE-OM to measure client outcomes, and it was also the benchmarking tool to set
service performance standards. It adopted a mixed-method research design using
survey and interview as data collection methods. The survey participants were clients
from 13 counselling psychology units in selected government hospitals around the
country, and the interview participants were the psychology officers (counselling).
The data collection methodology had two phases. The first phase entailed the
collection of pre- and post-CORE-OM questionnaires from 103 clients and the second
phase, involved a semi-structured interview with three psychology officers
(counselling). The findings showed that 9% of clients recovered, 66% of clients
improved, 16% of clients showed no-change, and 10% of clients had deteriorated. The
benchmarking tool—CORE-OM—had determined the service standards of each
outcome category. Based on the benchmarking values, one unit achieved the standard
for all outcome categories, while the rest showed average performances. The
interviews revealed themes on unit evaluation, workforce needs, outcomes concept
misunderstood, inappropriate tools, challenging counselling process and low mental
health campaigns. These themes had impacted the quantitative findings, and they shed
light on the interactions between the variables, which led to the counselling psychology units' average performance. The study has implications for theory,
practice, training, and future research. The study hoped that the Ministry of Health
would consider implementing CORE-OM for assessing client outcomes and as a
benchmarking tool for assessing service performance.
|
---|