Abstract
Objective There is a lack of guidance and literature on determining a safe caseload size and how community consultant psychiatrists (CCPs) manage their caseload. This paper therefore aims at exploring effective and safe ways of clinical caseload management by gaining a qualitative understanding of caseload management (CLM) practice of CCPs.
Design Cross sectional Qualitative research using semi structured interviews.
Setting The participants were CCPs working in National health service in Hampshire areas of United Kingdom.
Participants The target population comprised 11 CCPs working in the National Health Service (NHS) to get their view on current practice in NHS and compare past and present practices of CLM.
Main Outcome Measures A qualitative research method was used to explore the topic of CLM by collecting data through observations, interviews, questionnaires and then analysing the data using the coding and emergent themes method.
Results Caseload size for CCPs was higher than a manageable level and had an impact on their ability to service their other responsibilities such as strategic work; they did not have a shared view on setting a limit to their caseload. Majority of CCPs were not using CLM and did not have enough control on limiting their caseload size. Some CCPs were using time management and audit of caseload as effective CLM strategies. NWW was not being used equitably.
Conclusions Although the study represents the perceptions of limited number of CCPs, the findings of this study are unique and an important addition to the slight literature that exists on this topic. The results were in line with existing research that large caseloads can have negative impact on CCPs and their ability to provide effective care to the clients. The key factors determining the caseload size were highlighted. Proactive time management and proactive caseload size management were found to be effective tools for CLM. These supported by job planning meetings, Yearly appraisal, use of electronic data system and New ways of Working could be effective in maintaining a safe caseload size for the provision of safe and effective care. The data from this study can be used for requisite quantitative studies on a larger and statistically significant number of CCPs to find effectiveness of each CLM strategy.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
This is a non clinical study
Funding Statement
No Funding was used
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
1. Full names affiliations of all ethics oversight bodies that ruled on ethics of the study a)The research proposal was submitted to Ethics subcommittee School of Public policy and professional practice Keele University. The committee approved the project and suggested that I can proceed with the detailed design and fieldwork fieldwork b)Research and Development Sussex Education Centre Mill View Hospital Nevill Avenue Hove BN3 7HZ Ref: 5044-2014 Approval granted Thank you for your application to Sussex Partnership Trust for research governance approval of the above named study. I am pleased to inform you that you have all the necessary internal and external regulatory approvals to proceed. Details of your research project and any associated supporting documentation will be stored on an electronic database administered by the R&D Department. 2. Decision made, i.e. whether ethical approval was given or waived. Integrated research application system reference number 160489/683901/14/197 The project does not require review by our EC within the UK health departments research ethics service because 1. Research limited to use of the premises or facilities of care organisation (no involvement of patients/service users as participants). 2. Research limited to involvement of staff as participants (no involvement of patients/service users as participants).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data used in this study is available from the researchers on request