CYP IAPT 2014 National Conference This workshop will involve a short presentation regarding how the Sheffield CYP IAPT partnership has worked towards direct patient input of outcome measures, using IPads, and how the data is inputted directly into the patient recording system. This workshop will be useful for any partnership who would like to move towards paperless outcome measures for CYP IAPT

1. Paperless Outcome Measures
The journey so far
Feedback from Sheffield CAMHS
Claire Pearson, Consultant Clinical Psychologist,
Sheffield CAMHS and Service Lead for CYP-IAPT

2. Overview
 Why?
 History of the project
 What it looks like
 Experience of clinicians
 What happens next
 Questions

3. Why?
 CYP-IAPT
 Sheffield applied in 2013. Delay in applying due to
wanting IT systems and Patient Recording systems to be
fit for purpose.
 Vision: Paper less ROM’s
 Session by session routine outcome monitoring
○ Collaborative – aids user participation in therapy
○ Improves therapeutic alliance
○ Help identify when interventions are not working
○ Shorter care spell
More paper!?.....

4. History of the project
 Pilot Started in April 2012
 Leeds and Sheffield won a joint bid and paid Strand to
develop direct patient input of outcome measures.
 Meetings with Strand, IT and IG departments - Ipads
 Wi-fi installed at Beighton Jan 2013
 Training re why use outcome measures
 Pilot started in effect in July 2013
 Cont…

5. Cont..
 Includes 3 patient-rated outcome measures
 Session Rating Scale
 Outcome Rating Scale
 Goal Setting
 Initial problems identified September 2013
 Culture change – scheduling appointments!
 Became part of the CYP-IAPT programme
 Carenotes v.5 April 2014 corrected most of the issues
 Centenary wi-fi December 2013. Received I pads June
2014
 Training from Northumbria University: May and June
2014

6. What does it look like?
 Screen shots
 I pads – wifi only and because of IG
issues will not work outside of the
buildings
 Patients used are ‘test’ patients – so no
data protection issues.

10. Initial problems
 Faces did not respond to touch
 Can’t slide marker along the scale
 Wrong wording of the questionnaires
 Incorrect sequencing of questionnaires
 Graphs made no sense / inaccessible
 Short log out times
 Clinicians feeling comfortable with I pads

13. Experience of clinicians
 Engagement with families
 Barrier / Tool
 Application to range of clinical work
 Art therapy, family therapy, medication review etc.
 Clinician avoidance
 Not wanting to inconvenience families
 Not wanting to look incompetent!
 Not compulsory & problems not rectified
USUEse lMessORE
MORE FAMILIAR
Less familiar
Takes longer
Look more incompetent
TAKES LESS TIME
LOOK MORE COMPETENT!

14. What happens next
 CY-IAPT target = 90% of cases with at least 2
data points:
 2 Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMS)
○ ORS, SRS, Goals
 2 standardised measures
○ RCADS, SDQ
○ Recorded on paper, transferred to CareNotes
 Current view form
○ Problem descriptions & Complexity factors
Belief
 Implementation date for CAMHS: 14th July 2014
 More workshops, away days planned
 Monthly feedback to staff
Emotions

15. Sheffield Outcomes Team
 Carenotes specialist
 IT specialist
 Assistant Psychologist
 Outcomes lead
 Monthly CYP-IAPT and ROM’s meetings
with all key staff
 Feedback to staff essential

16. Where are we now?
 Still mixture of paper and paperless
 We have just embarked on the whole service
using outcome measures ( july – sept 2014)
 124 new patients seen
 85% current view
 56% SDQ time one
 15% RCADS time one
 23% CORS
 20 % SRS
 9 % goals
 28% given consent !

17. Questions