Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Continuity of care: Validation of a new self-report measure for individuals using mental health services

  • Regular Articles
  • Published:
The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Continuity of care is a concern for individuals with persistent mental illness who need diverse services over time in response to multiple and changing needs. Efforts to study continuity have been hampered by lack of appropriate instruments. The Alberta Continuity of Services Scale — Mental Health is a newly developed, self-report scale that assesses continuity of care across settings and providers. This study examined the structure, reliability, and validity of the measure among users of community mental health programs. Findings were positive. Scores captured both positive and negative perceptions of care. Factor analyses elucidated 3 components of continuity—system access, interpersonal aspects, and care team function. Associations between the continuity scores and selected client and service use measures supported its validity. The tool holds promise for system monitoring, but would need refinements to create a shorter, conceptually clearer version. Also, performance among individuals with mild and very severe levels of mental illness needs to be evaluated.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bachrach LL. Asylum and chronically ill psychiatric patients.American Journal of Psychiatry. 1984;141(8):975–978.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Lamb HR. Deinstitutionalization and the homeless mentally ill.Hospital and Community Psychiatry. 1984;35(9):899–907.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bachrach LL. The state of the State Mental Hospital in 1996.Psychiatric Services. 1996;47(10):1071–1078.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Herman NJ, Smith CM. Mental hospital depopulation in Canada: patient perspectives.Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. 1989;34:386–391.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Morrissey JP, Calloway M, Bartko WT, Ridgely MS, Goldman HH, Paulson RI. Local mental health authorities and service system change: evidence from the Robert Wood Johnson Program on chronic mental illness.The Milbank Quarterly. 1994;72(1):49–80.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Mechanic D. Technologies for the delivery of mental health care.International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 1996;12(4):673–687.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Hadley TR. Financing changes and their impact on the organization of the public mental health system.Administration & Policy in Mental Health. 1996;23(5):393–405.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bond GR, Drake RE, Mueser KT, et al. Assertive community treatment for people with severe mental illness.Disease Management and Health Outcomes. 2001;9(3):141–159.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Provan KG. Services integration for vulnerable populations: lessons from community mental health.Family and Community Health. 1997;19(4):19–30.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bachrach LL. Continuity of care for chronic mental patients: a conceptual analysis.American Journal of Psychiatry. 1981;138(11):1449–1456.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Donaldson MS. Continuity of care: a reconceptualization.Medical Care Research and Review. 2001;58(3):255–290.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Reid R, Haggerty J, McKendry R.Defusing the Confusion: Concepts and Measures of Continuity of Healthcare. Final Report. Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Health Services Research Foundation; 2002;1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Barbato A, Terzian E, Saraceno B, et al. Patterns of aftercare for psychiatric patients discharged after short in-patient treatment.Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology. 1992;27:46–52.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Rosenblatt A, Attkisson CC. Assessing outcomes for sufferers of severe mental disorder: a conceptual framework and review.Evaluation and Program Planning. 1993;16:347–363.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Tessler RC. Continuity of care and client outcome.Psychosocial Rehabilitation Journal. 1987;6(1):39–52.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Department of Health.Health of the Nation. Building Bridges. A Guide to Interagency Working for the Care and Protection of Severely Mental Ill People. London: Department of Health; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Ontario Ministry of Health.Making It Happen. Implementation Plan for Mental Health Reform. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Queen's Printer for Ontario; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Johnson S, Prosser D, Bindman J, et al. Continuity of care for the severely mentally ill: concepts and measures.Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology. 1997;32:137–142.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Saarento O, Oiesvold T, Sytema S, et al. The nordic comparative study on sectorized psychiatry: continuity of care related to characteristics of the psychiatric services and the patients.Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology. 1998;33:521–527.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Farrell SP, Koch JR, Blank M. Rural and urban differences in continuity of care after state hospital discharge.Psychiatric Services. 1996;47(7):652–654.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Bickman L. A continuum of care: more is not always better.American Psychologist. 1996;51(7):689–701.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Bindman J, Johnson S, Szmukler G, et al. Continuity of care and clinical outcome: a prospective cohort study.Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology. 2000;35:242–247.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Abbati J, Oles G. Continuity of care in serious mental illness. Psychiatric Bulletin. 1993;17:140–141.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Lehman AF, Postrado LT, Roth D, et al. Continuity of care and client outcomes in the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Program on chronic mental illness.The Milbank Quarterly. 1994;72(1):105–122.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Smith TE, Hull JW, Hedayat-Harris A, et al. Development of a vertically integrated program of services for persons with schizophrenia.Psychiatric Services. 1999;50(7):931–935.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Bauer MS, McBride L, Shea N, et al. Impact of an easy-access va clinic-based program for patients with bipolar disorder.Psychiatric Services. 1997;48(4):491–496.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Ware NC, Tugenberg T, Dickey B, et al. An ethnographic study of the meaning of continuity of care in mental health services.Psychiatric Services. 1999;50(3):395–400.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Kuno E, Rothbard AB, Sands RG. Service components of case management which reduce inpatient care use for persons with serious mental illness.Community-Mental-Health-Journal. 1999;35(2):153–167.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Eisen SV, Shaul JA, Leff HS, et al. Toward a National Consumer Survey: evaluation of the CABHS and MHSIP instruments.The Journal of Behavioural Health Services & Research. 2001;28(3):347–369.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Druss BG, Rosenheck RA, Stolar M. Patient satisfaction and administrative measures as indicators of the quality of mental health care.Psychiatric Services. 1999;50:1053–1058.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Durbin J, Cochrane J, Goering P, et al. Needs-based planning: an evaluation of a level-of-Care Planning Model.The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research. 2001;28(1):67–80.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Dow MG, Ward JC, Saunders TL, et al.Program Evaluation and Outcome Assessment Project, HRS District 7, Phase Three Summary. Tampa, Fla: Department of Community Mental Health, Florida Mental Health Institute, University of South Florida; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  33. DeVellis RF.Scale Development: Theory and Applications. London: Sage; 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Norman GR, Streiner DL.Biostatistics: The Bare Essentials. 2nd ed. Hamilton, Ontario, Canada: BC Decker; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS.Using Multivariate Statistics. 4th ed. Boston: Allyn & Bacon; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Cicchetti DV. Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized instruments in psychology.Psychological Assessment. 1994;6:284–290.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Bachrach LL. Continuity of care and approaches to case management for long-term mentally ill patients.Hospital and Community Psychiatry. 1993;44(5):465–468.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Pugh TF, MacMahon B. Measurement of discontinuity of psychiatric in-patient care.Public Health Reports. 1967;82:533–538.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Streiner DL, Norman GR.Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide To Their Development and Use. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press; 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Cocozza JJ, Steadman HJ, Dennis DL, et al. Creating successful systems integration strategies: lessons from the ACCESS Program for persons who are homeless and mentally ill.Administration & Policy in Mental Health. 2000;27(6):395–407.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Cornelius LJ. The degree of usual provider continuity for African and Latino Americans.Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved. 1997;8(2):170–185.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Rosenheck R, Cicchetti D. A mental health report card: a multidimensional approach to performance monitoring in public mental health programs,Community Mental Health Journal. 1998;34(1):85–106.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Druss B, Miller C, Rosenheck R, et al. Mental health care delivery under managed care in the United States: a view from the Health Employer Data and Information Set (HEDIS).American Journal of Psychiatry. 2002;159(5):860–862.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Health Systems Research and Consulting Unit, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, USA

    Janet Durbin MSc (Research Scientist) & Paula Goering PhD, RN (Professor)

  2. Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, 33 Russell St, T310, M5S 2S1, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

    Janet Durbin MSc (Research Scientist), Paula Goering PhD, RN (Professor) & David L. Streiner PhD, CPsych (Professor)

  3. Kunin-Lunenfeld Applied Research Unit at Baycrest Centre for Geriatric Care, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

    David L. Streiner PhD, CPsych (Professor)

  4. the Department of Health Policy and Administration at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC

    George Pink PhD (Professor)

Authors
  1. Janet Durbin MSc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paula Goering PhD, RN
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David L. Streiner PhD, CPsych
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. George Pink PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Janet Durbin MSc.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Durbin, J., Goering, P., Streiner, D.L. et al. Continuity of care: Validation of a new self-report measure for individuals using mental health services. The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research 31, 279–296 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02287291

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02287291

Keywords

Search

Navigation