PB CPD Online e-learning site
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
British Journal of Psychiatry Advances in Psychiatric Treatment All RCPsych Journals
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Psychiatric Bulletin (2004) 28: 244-247. doi: 10.1192/pb.28.7.244
© 2004 The Royal College of Psychiatrists
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an eLetter
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tacchi, M. J.
Right arrow Articles by Scott, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Tacchi, M. J.
Right arrow Articles by Scott, J.
Psychiatric Bulletin (2004) 28: 244-247
© 2004 The Royal College of Psychiatrists

Evaluation of a partial hospitalisation programme: good news and bad

Mary Jane Tacchi, Consultant Psychiatrist

Crisis Assessment and Treatment Service, Ravenswood Clinic, Ravenswood Road, Heaton, Newcastle upon Tyne NE6 5TX

Suresh Joseph, Consultant Psychiatrist

Newcastle General Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne

Jan Scott, Professor of Psychological Treatments Research

Institute of Psychiatry, London

AIMS AND METHOD

To evaluate a 50-place partial hospitalisation programme during its first year of operation. Data were recorded for consecutive referrals to the programme. Its effects on the admission unit were also assessed.

RESULTS

The unit received over 200 referrals over 12 months, and more than 60% were for individuals who might otherwise have been admitted. The programme was associated with reductions in number and duration of hospital admissions and in bed occupancy rate; however, the proportion of urgent referrals to the programme doubled over the year, and after 12 months the occupancy rate was 96%.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

The programme was well received by clients and well used by clinicians. Although it initially reduced the pressure on in-patient services, the problems confronting the programme at the end of the evaluation mirrored those of in-patient units.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
British Journal of Psychiatry Advances in Psychiatric Treatment All RCPsych Journals
Copyright © 2004 The Royal College of Psychiatrists.