Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1080/00048670701449211
DC FieldValue
dc.titleCulturally specific process measures to improve mental health clinical practice: Indigenous focus
dc.contributor.authorO'Brien, A.P.
dc.contributor.authorBoddy, J.M.
dc.contributor.authorHardy, D.J.
dc.date.accessioned2015-09-07T09:55:23Z
dc.date.available2015-09-07T09:55:23Z
dc.date.issued2007-08
dc.identifier.citationO'Brien, A.P., Boddy, J.M., Hardy, D.J. (2007-08). Culturally specific process measures to improve mental health clinical practice: Indigenous focus. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 41 (8) : 667-674. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1080/00048670701449211
dc.identifier.issn00048674
dc.identifier.urihttp://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/120663
dc.description.abstractObjective: In New Zealand and Australia, a renewed emphasis on equity and efficiency in the provision of mental health care has seen outcomes-focused, culturally appropriate clinical practice become essential within mental health services. Ascertaining the degree to which quality improvement and monitoring systems are enhancing professional practice and patient outcomes, however, is hindered by the difficulty of measuring the process of quality care delivery. Method: This paper argues that it is the process of care delivery (i.e. what clinicians do to, and for, patients) that is critical to the effectiveness of treatment and the degree to which treatment either inhibits or promotes an improvement in mental health recovery. Identification of the underlying causes of poor achievement of process factors is likely to positively impact on things such as readmission rates, shared care initiatives, and ultimately patient recovery. Such attention could be the difference between low-quality service provision and a high-quality service provision with positive recovery outcomes for patients. Results: Ascertaining the degree to which quality improvement and monitoring systems are enhancing professional practice and patient outcomes for indigenous people, however, is hindered by the difficulty of measuring such concepts. Australia has indeed embraced 'culturally appropriate' practice in recent years, but this appears to be piecemeal when compared with New Zealand. Certainly, there are inconsistent and variable approaches to cultural practices with indigenous people when comparing the two countries. Conclusions: Using evidence from a bicultural mental health nursing study that developed and validated generic and Mâori-specific (indigenous) clinical indicators for mental health nursing standards of practice in New Zealand, it is argued that the process of care delivery is equally as important as outcome measures when ascertaining the effectiveness of nursing care. Second, this paper contends that accurate process measures must be culturally responsive to indigenous and other ethnic groups.
dc.description.urihttp://libproxy1.nus.edu.sg/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00048670701449211
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectClinical indicators
dc.subjectCulture
dc.subjectIndigenous
dc.subjectMental health
dc.subjectProcess
dc.typeArticle
dc.contributor.departmentNURSING/ALICE LEE CTR FOR NURSING STUD
dc.description.doi10.1080/00048670701449211
dc.description.sourcetitleAustralian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry
dc.description.volume41
dc.description.issue8
dc.description.page667-674
dc.description.codenANZPB
dc.identifier.isiut000248881700005
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications

Show simple item record
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

13
checked on Oct 19, 2019

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

14
checked on Oct 11, 2019

Page view(s)

69
checked on Oct 11, 2019

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.