Quality Measures Database

Keywords

Domains

Process
	Acceptability
	Accessibility
	Appropriateness
	Competence
	Continuity
	Effectiveness
	Efficiency
	Safety
	Comprehensiveness
	Patient-Centeredness
	Legal

Outcome
	Health Conditions
	Human Function
	Well-Being
	Deaths
	Service Outputs
	Satisfaction
	Impact on Society

Structure
	Physical Infrastructure
	Personnel Management
	Information Management
	Financial Management
	Quality and Safety

Non-Medical Determinants of Health
	Health Behaviors
	Living and Working Conditions
	Personal Resources
	Environmental Factors
	Health Literacy

Equity
	Equity

Specific Conditions
	Comorbid Conditions
	Chronic Conditions
	Acute Conditions
	Substance Abuse
	Anxiety Disorders
	Somatoform Disorders
	Sleep Disorders
	Eating Disorders
	Personality Disorders
	Mood Disorders
	Psychosis
	Impulse Control Disorders
	Elderly
	Reproductive Mental Health Disorders

Special Groups
	Ethnic / Cultural Minorities
	People Who Live in Rural Areas
	People with a Family History of a Mental Health Condition
	Social Service Welfare Recipients
	Homeless or Itinerant
	Unemployed
	Aboriginal
	Seniors in Facilities
	Recent Refugees
	Immigrants
	Residents of Correctional Institutions
	Inner City Residents
	Speakers of English as a Second Language

Age Groups
	Elderly
	Adult
	Youth
	Children
	Children

Gender Groups
	Women
	Men
	Gender Identities Other Than Men or Women

Interventions
	Medication
	Psychotherapy
	Peer Support
	Prevention
	Other Somatic Treatments
	Early Detection
	Health Promotion
	Family Involvement
	Group Treatment
	Self-Management Support
	Rehabilitation
	Physical Health Intervention

Clinical Setting
	Shared Care
	Emergency Services
	School-based Mental Health Services
	Work-based Mental Health Services
	Outreach Services
	Solo Practitioner
	Group Family Practitioner
	Community Health Care Centre
	Walk in Clinics

Level of Evidence

	I	Consistently higher quality studies specifically focused on primary mental health care.
	II	Less rigorous studies specifically focused on primary mental health care or extrapolated from higher quality studies from secondary mental health care.
	III	Preliminary research evidence only or evidence based on consensus opinion only.
	IV	Evidence based on individual expert opinion.
	V	Validated scale: Research has been conducted to determine it has at least some properties associated with a high quality scale
	VI	Non-validated scale: Research regarding the quality of the scale has not been conducted.

Measure Ranking

From To

Detailed Results

Use checkboxes to select measures to print or display

Avoid Single-Session Crisis Debreifing

Overall Rank: 96

Inappropriate intervention: Proportion of individuals who report experiencing a traumatic event and are offered single session interventions (often referred to as debriefing) as this intervention can increase the risk of developing post traumatic stress disorder

Domain : Patients with Acute Conditions

This special area domain refers to those patients whose conditions require an immediate intervention, such as an emergency room visit.
Additional Domain(s) : Psychotherapy

Rationale

Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) develops following a stressful event or situation of an exceptionally threatening or catastrophic nature, which is likely to cause pervasive distress in almost anyone. Around 2530% of people experiencing a traumatic event may go on to develop PTSD. Practical support delivered in an empathetic manner is important in promoting recovery for PTSD, but it is unlikely that a single session of a psychological intervention will be helpful.

Primary Reference

National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health. (2005). Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD): The management of PTSD in adults and children in primary and secondary care. London, UK: National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Retrieved Aug 3, 2006 from: http://www.nice.org.uk/page.aspx?o=CG026niceguideline

Level of Evidence

I: Consistently higher quality studies specifically focused on primary mental health care.

Summarized Comments

Add Comment

Too rare for much impact
If this evidence is clear that it is not helpful then it would appear high for both relevance and action.
But should be offered resources/follow up if desired.

Variation in Results

Ratings-based Rank

Relevance	116
Actionability	85
Overall Importance	85

Stakeholder Rank

Academics	87
Clinicians	105
Consumers	100
Decision Makers	104

�

Special Group Rank

First Nations	98
Rural Areas	95
Federal Stakeholders	135

Regional Rank

BC	AB	SK	MB	ON	QC	NB	NS	PE	NL	YT	NT	NU
95	113	81	138	69	84	82	138	40	53	56	139	105

Overall Rank

SA09c (H446)

Distribution of Survey Respondent Ratings

Relevance

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

Low

High

Actionability

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

Low

High

Overall Importance

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

3 = can live without
2 = nice to have
1 = indispensable

Use checkboxes to select measures to print or display

The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the official policies of Health Canada