Citation

Bindman J, Beck A, Thornicroft G, Knapp M, Szmukler G. Br. J. Psychiatry 2000; 177: 33-37.

Affiliation

Section of Community Psychiatry (PRiSM), Institute of Psychiatry, Denmark Hill, London.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2000, Royal College of Psychiatry)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

10945085

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Mental health provider trusts in England were required in 1994 to establish local Supervision Registers of patients at risk. AIMS: To identify the factors associated with registration, and obtain clinicians' views on its effectiveness. METHOD: At a random sample of 14 trusts data were collected from case notes, key workers and responsible medical officers. RESULTS: A sample of 133 registered patients were more disabled and had more extensive histories of violence and self-harm than 126 comparison patients on the upper tier of the Care Programme Approach (CPA). Those registered were a heterogeneous group. For some there was little evidence of risk. In most cases clinicians did not believe registration had improved care. CONCLUSIONS: The Supervision Register policy has not resulted in the identification of a well-defined group. Its effectiveness is limited by the lack of operationalized measures of risk.

Language: en