Abstract
Mental health provider trusts in England were required in 1994 to establish local Supervision Registers of patients at risk. To identify the factors associated with registration, and obtain clinicians' views on its effectiveness. At a random sample of 14 trusts data were collected from case notes, key workers and responsible medical officers. 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. 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.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
