You don't need to be signed in to read BMJ Group Blogs, but you can register here to receive updates about other BMJ Group products and services via our Group site.

These are shocking figures

25 Sep, 09 | by Steven Reid, Evidence-Based Mental Health

This was the response of a spokesman for the charity Rethink to the results of the national survey of mental health inpatient services published today by the Care Quality Commission (the regulator of health and social care for England). You can see both the national results and those for individual trusts here. Of course, his comments were not a reaction to the three quarters of patients who rated their care as good, very good or excellent. Or the 85% who felt they were made welcome on admission. No, the headline findings are that the majority of respondents felt unsafe at times during their stay on a psychiatric ward, information about their care was lacking, and that only a minority were offered any sort of talking treatment.

I tend to view these surveys with scepticism. The questions are often worded ambiguously and how representative can you be with a response rate of 28%? Yet, the results here surely come as no surprise. It was only last year that the president of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, Dinesh Bhugra, lambasted inpatient units, calling them unsafe, overcrowded and uninhabitable: ‘I would not use them, and neither would I let any of my relatives do so.’

So why are mental health wards so unsatisfactory? Inpatient psychiatry has been neglected as a consequence of the emphasis on community care, a development not limited to the UK (see a previous post ‘A Place of Greater Safety’). Resources were diverted from comparatively expensive inpatient units, with a reduction in bed numbers leaving room only for the most severely ill: in the inner cities detention under the Mental Health Act is almost a requirement for admission. This has led to overcrowded, high-turnover wards filled with patients at their most unwell – is it any surprise that people feel unsafe at times? And faced with this pressure cooker environment the most talented and motivated staff soon joint the flight to fashionable, well-resourced, specialist teams in the community.

The Care Services minister Phil Hope is, um, hopeful: “We will make sure that the experiences people have shared in this report feed into New Horizons, our new vision for mental health.” Of which more later…

By submitting your comment you agree to adhere to these terms and conditions
  • http://google Phil

    The Quality Care Commision appears to continue to focus on it’s own existance. Would somebody please explain to me why it is so keen to threaten departments of the NHS, yet turn a blind eye to the neglect of residents living in profit driven private care homes ? I have experience of working in both and have seen at first hand how simple it is for the canny businesman/woman running these homes to continue to earn a good living by taking unacceptable shortcuts at the expense of thier own client base. Naturally there are well run care homes, but few come near the standards of care the NHS offers.

    Is there something odd going on ? Is thier a two tier system of acceptable standards ? Or are they(Q C C) just too afraid to open up a can of politically minded worms ?

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
EBMH blog homepage

HeadtoHead

A quarterly digest of the most important clinical research of relevance to clinicians in mental health.Visit site

Latest from Evidence-Based Mental Health

Latest from Evidence Based Mental Health