Assessing the Content Validity of the Revised Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS 2018)

Reliability testing of the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales 2018

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT

The Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) is a widely used clinical measure designed to rate and monitor the outcomes of service users accessing specialist mental healthcare. Since its development (in 1996), numerous research studies have confirmed the HoNOS captures the aspects of care that it purports to (validity), and that clinicians' ratings are consistent both over time, and between different raters (reliability).

WHAT THE PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE

In 2018, the HoNOS was reviewed with updates made to some terminology and other revisions intended to remove ambiguity in the guidance for raters. However, although the new version (HoNOS 2018) was accompanied by a recommendation that its validity and reliability be re-tested this was not undertaken. To our knowledge, this is the first study to re-assess the updated tool's reliability by measuring the level of agreement between different raters. Our findings confirm that there is an acceptable level of consistency between student mental health nurses that have been trained to use the (new) HoNOS 2018.

WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The HoNOS is nationally mandated for use by all specialist mental healthcare providers in the UK. Our findings provide some assurance that, with appropriate update training and monitoring of organisational-level data sets, the original HoNOS glossary can safely be replaced with the HoNOS 2018 to ensure more contemporary routine outcome measurement can occur.

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) is a well-established clinician rated outcome measure for use in mental health services. Following an international review, an updated version (HoNOS 2018) was published with a recommendation that its psychometric properties be re-tested prior to widespread implementation. To date, only one such study has been published.

AIMS

To test the inter-rater agreement levels for HoNOS 2018.

METHOD

Third-year student mental health nurses received training to complete the HoNOS 2018. Following this timetabled session, they were each invited to independently rate two, randomly selected, videos of (simulated) patient interviews. The resulting data were then analysed to calculate the tool's internal consistency and inter-rater agreement levels.

RESULTS

The 55 participants provided 106 ratings from four vignettes. Cronbach's alphas and McDonalds omegas confirmed the revised tool's internal consistency was acceptable. Average measure intraclass correlation coefficients for the four patient vignettes indicated excellent reliability.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This study provides initial assurance that the HoNOS 2018 is a reliable clinician rated outcome measure suitable for use in routine clinical practice by relatively inexperienced mental health practitioners with limited training.

Determinants of clinical outcome and length of stay in acute care forensic psychiatry units

Criminological and sociodemographic variables, such as previous criminal convictions, increased risk of violence, early onset of mental disorder, antisocial personality, psychosis and low social support, have all been related to longer length of stay (LoS) and poorer outcome in long stay forensic services. The factors impacting on LoS and clinical response in acute care specialized units are poorly documented. To address this issue, we examined the psychiatric records of all cases admitted between January 1st and December 31th 2020 in the sole acute ward for detained persons located in the central prison of the Geneva County, Switzerland. Information on judicial status included pre-trial versus sentence execution, previous incarcerations, and age of the first incarceration. Sociodemographic data included age, gender, marital status, and education attainment. Previous inpatient stays prior to incarceration were recorded. All of the ICD-10 clinical diagnoses were made by two independent, board-certified psychiatrists blind to the scope of the study. The standardized assessment was based on the HoNOS (Health of Nation Outcome Scales) at admission and discharge, HONOS-secure at admission, HCR-20 (Historical Clinical Risk 20) version 2, PCL-R (Psychopathy Checklist Revised), and SAPROF (Structured Assessment of Protective Factors). Stepwise forward multiple linear regression models predicting the LoS and delta HONOS respectively were built with the above mentioned parameters. The selected variables were then used in univariate and multivariable regression models. Higher HCR-scores (mainly on clinical items), and longer LoS were related to higher delta HONOS scores. In contrast, cases in pre-trial detention showed a worst clinical outcome. In multivariable models, all three variables remained independent predictors of the clinical outcome and explained 30.7% of its variance. Only education and diagnosis of borderline personality were related to the LoS and explained 12.6% of its variance in multivariable models. Our results suggest that the use of acute wards specialized in forensic psychiatry are mainly useful for patients with prior inpatient care experience, and higher violence risk during sentence execution. In contrast, they seem to be less performant for persons in pre-trial detention that could benefit from less restrictive clinical settings.