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

Fee Item for Case Management

Overall Rank: 110

Existence of a fee-item within the fee-for-service schedule that reimburses physicians for case consultation/case management activities.

Domain : Continuity

Services are offered as a coherent and coordinated succession of events in keeping with the health needs and personal context of patients. Health care is linked to other services to support successful treatment.
Additional Domain(s) : Accessibility, Financial Management

Rationale

Given the pivotal role of general practitioners in the management of persons with SMI, it is essential that there is communication around care planning between physicians and other providers. Fee schedules which do not reimburse
physicians for case consultation limit the ability of these practitioners to coordinate their role with community mental health service personnel and provide effective care to patients with multiple needs. Alternate physician reimbursement mechanisms (contract, salary) may also provide practitioners
with more opportunities to coordinate care with other care providers.

Primary Reference

McEwan, K. & Goldman, E.M. (2001). Accountability and Performance Indicators for Mental Health Services and Supports: A Resource Kit. Ottawa, ON: Health Canada. Retrieved Aug 3, 2006 from: http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/mh-sm/pdf/apimhss.pdf

Level of Evidence

III: Preliminary research evidence only or evidence based on consensus opinion only.

Summarized Comments

Add Comment

* Either a "fee-for-service" item as described or an alternate payment (e.g. sessional-type) which includes a range of activities relevant to primary health care teams.
* It implies acceptance of existing fee structure/ remuneration plan.
* May be one mechanism to achieve goal but not the only one. Not highly actionable at PHC practice level but would be at province/RHA/ medical association level.
*I question whether it would make any difference to the patients care without a PHC team in place.

Variation in Results

Ratings-based Rank

Relevance	100
Actionability	119
Overall Importance	102

Stakeholder Rank

Academics	88
Clinicians	82
Consumers	156
Decision Makers	96

�

Special Group Rank

First Nations	127
Rural Areas	132
Federal Stakeholders	107

Regional Rank

BC	AB	SK	MB	ON	QC	NB	NS	PE	NL	YT	NT	NU
105	93	121	124	113	96	103	102	21	94	10	157	156

Overall Rank

110

SW04g (H599)

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