IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v20y2011i1-2p214-226.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An evaluation of a mental health screening and referral pathway for community nursing care: nurses’ and general practitioners’ perspectives

Author

Listed:
  • Merilyn Annells
  • Jacqui Allen
  • Russell Nunn
  • Lyn Lang
  • Eileen Petrie
  • Eileen Clark
  • Alan Robins

Abstract

Aims and objectives. To evaluate a feasible, best practice mental health screening and referral clinical pathway for generalist community nursing care of war veterans and war widow(er)s in Australia. Background. War veterans commonly experience mental health difficulties and do not always receive required treatment, as can also occur for war widow(er)s. Whenever opportunity arises, such as during community nursing care, it is vital to identify mental health problems in a health promotion framework. Design. A clinical pathway was developed by literature review and consultation and then trialled and evaluated using mixed methods – quantitative and qualitative. Methods. Community nurses who trialled the pathway completed an evaluation survey and attended focus groups. General practitioners responded to an evaluation survey. Results. Most nurses found the pathway clear and easy to understand but not always easy to use. They emphasised the need to establish trust and rapport with clients prior to implementing the pathway. It was sometimes difficult to ensure effective referral to general practitioners for clients who screened positive for a mental health problem. When referral was accomplished, general practitioners reported adequate and useful information was provided. Some general practitioners also commented on the difficulty of achieving effective communication between general practitioners and nurses. Conclusions. Nurses and some general practitioners found the pathway useful for their practice. They offered several suggestions for improvement by simplifying the trialled pathway and accompanying guidelines and strategies to improve communication between nurses and general practitioners. This study adds understanding of how community nurses might productively screen for mental health difficulties. Relevance to clinical practice. The trialled pathway, which was modified and refined following the study, is an evidence‐based resource for community nurses in Australia and similar contexts to guide practise and maximise holistic care for war veterans and war widow(er)s and possibly other client groups.

Suggested Citation

  • Merilyn Annells & Jacqui Allen & Russell Nunn & Lyn Lang & Eileen Petrie & Eileen Clark & Alan Robins, 2011. "An evaluation of a mental health screening and referral pathway for community nursing care: nurses’ and general practitioners’ perspectives," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(1‐2), pages 214-226, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:20:y:2011:i:1-2:p:214-226
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03275.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03275.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03275.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:20:y:2011:i:1-2:p:214-226. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.