|
|
|
|
|
Janet M. Coffman, MPP, MA, Health Services & Policy Analysis, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, 2140 Shattuck Avenue, Suite 309, Berkeley, CA 94720-5610, 510-642-2853, janetmc@uclink.berkeley.edu, Joan R. Bloom, PhD, Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, 2140 Shattuck Avenue, Suite 309, Berkeley, CA 94720-5610, Soo H Kang, DrPH, Center for Mental Health Services Research - School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, 2140 Shattuck Avenue, Suite 309, Berkeley, CA 94720-5610, and Neal Wallace, PhD, School of Goverment, Public Administration Division, Portland State University, PO Box 751, 97207-0751, Portland, OR 97207-0751.
Advancing evidence-based practice in mental health requires analysis of data on valid indicators of clients’ mental health. The purpose of this study is to validate the Colorado Client Assessment Record (CCAR), an instrument that has been used to collect client information in Colorado and at least six other states for over 20 years. We are computing Pearson’s and canonical correlations between items in the CCAR problem severity and functional status scales and two well-validated instruments, the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) and the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF). We are examining correlations between variables measuring the level of and change in problem severity and functional status. Data were collected by research interviewers who administered the three instruments to a sample of 522 clients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder enrolled in the Colorado Medicaid program in 1995 and 1996. Preliminary analyses suggest that the CCAR problem severity scale is highly correlated with the BPRS (first canonical correlation = 0.93 for problem severity with eight canonical correlations above 0.5, and 0.87 for change in problem severity with eight canonical correlations above 0.5). The CCAR functional status scale is correlated with the GAF (first canonical correlation = 0.43 for functional status and 0.38 for change in functional status). Our findings suggest that the CCAR problem severity and functional status scales are valid indicators of mental health status and outcomes that clinicians, managers, and policymakers can use to assess clients’ needs and the impact of innovations in clinical practice, organization, and financing.
Learning Objectives: At the conclusion of the session, participants will be able to
Keywords: Mental Health Services, Outcome Measures
Presenting author's disclosure statement:
I do not have any significant financial interest/arrangement or affiliation with any organization/institution whose products or services are being discussed in this session.