Premium
Reflections on benchmarking NHS primary care psychological therapies and counselling
Author(s) -
Mellor-Clark John,
Barkham Michael,
Mothersole Geoff,
McInnes Barry,
Evans Richard
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
counselling and psychotherapy research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.38
H-Index - 32
eISSN - 1746-1405
pISSN - 1473-3145
DOI - 10.1080/14733140600581531
Subject(s) - benchmarking , best practice , guideline , reflective practice , psychology , interpretation (philosophy) , good practice , primary care , face (sociological concept) , service (business) , clinical practice , medical education , public relations , engineering ethics , nursing , medicine , sociology , computer science , management , political science , pedagogy , business , engineering , marketing , social science , family medicine , pathology , programming language , economics
The concluding paper in this series provides brief reflections from a range of key individuals involved in the development and interpretation of CORE benchmarks for NHS primary care psychological therapy and counselling services. Michael Barkham firstly reflects on some of the research challenges facing the use of benchmarks derived from practice‐based evidence, before acknowledging the potential for such data to help bridge the research‐practice gap as we learn the best use of it. Geoff Mothersole considers similar challenges in using real world data, and explores some of the challenges that managers face in using benchmarks for improved service management practice. Barry McInnes increases the magnification in his reflective focus and looks at the juxtaposition of national guideline recommendations from evidence‐based practice in contrast to those introduced by the growing practice evidence‐base suggesting differential therapist effectiveness. The first of two final strategic reflective perspectives includes Richard Evans's summary of some of the hidden lessons from the benchmarking endeavour to‐date, before my own personal concluding summary looking at lessons learned for the on‐going strategic development of enhanced support for routine quality evaluation.