Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

What is quality care? A clinician's view.

R W Menninger

    The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry
    |July 1, 1977
    PubMed
    Summary

    Government criteria for national health insurance may undermine psychiatric treatment quality. Defining "quality treatment" is crucial for effective mental healthcare policy and patient outcomes.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    The therapeutic environment and team approach at the Menninger Hospital.

    Psychiatry and clinical neurosciences·1999
    Same author

    Stress. The profession, the family and you.

    Alabama medicine : journal of the Medical Association of the State of Alabama·1994
    Same author

    Psychiatric services in a managed care world.

    Health systems review·1991
    Same author

    The psychology of postponement in the medical marriage.

    JAMA·1989
    Same author

    Trends in American psychiatry: implications for psychiatry in Japan.

    Seishin shinkeigaku zasshi = Psychiatria et neurologia Japonica·1989
    Same author

    Sources of conflict in the medical marriage.

    The American journal of psychiatry·1987

    Area of Science:

    • Health Policy
    • Psychiatry
    • Healthcare Economics

    Background:

    • National health insurance proposals necessitate government-defined criteria for reimbursable psychiatric treatments.
    • These criteria are often framed as cost-control measures, with quality maintenance cited as a secondary justification.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To critically evaluate the potential impact of government-imposed criteria on the quality of psychiatric treatment.
    • To explore the challenges in defining and measuring

    Main Methods:

    • Conceptual analysis of healthcare policy and psychiatric treatment standards.
    • Review of existing literature on quality metrics in mental healthcare.
    • Discussion of the implications of cost-containment strategies on clinical practice.

    Main Results:

    • Pre-established government criteria for psychiatric treatment reimbursement may not ensure, and could potentially degrade, treatment quality.
    • The justification of criteria based on quality maintenance is questionable under current frameworks.

    Conclusions:

    • Urgent need for a robust, evidence-based definition of "quality treatment" in psychiatry.
    • Policy development must prioritize genuine quality enhancement over potentially detrimental cost-control measures.
    • Rethinking the approach to setting standards for mental healthcare services is essential.

    Related Experiment Videos