Page 37 - Demo

Primary mental healthcare: a scoping review35244, 68, 108 Particularly in cross-domain collaboration, it may be unclear who is involved, how responsibilities are shared, and how care is financed. 47, 83, 86, 88, 89, 96, 104 It is mentioned that adequate division of responsibilities may depend on the main causal factor(s) of the MHD and may necessitate using care plans and convening case conferences. 68 Responsibilities should be clearly stated in writing and reviewed regularly. 88 Consequently, suggested preconditions for effective collaboration are accessible referral options, clarity about referral procedures, adequate information exchange between the professionals, and consensus on responsibilities. 3, 24, 39, 41, 88, 94, 96, 107It is noted as a barrier that, from a historical point of view, primary and secondary care services are separate units culturally, 98 organisationally, 42and financially. 96, 98, 101 To improve the quality of collaboration, the roles of both GPs and other involved professionals should be defined more clearly, 60, 72 existing models should be evaluated, 42, 109 clinical pathways and/or models should be improved, 24, 42, 109 specialist capacity should be enhanced, 41 and payment models should be re-examined to stimulate collaborative care. 98, 101Policymakers’ involvement in this matter is seen as important. 98, 101A standardised approach In several publications, a standardised approach is seen as a way to improve the quality of care for patients with both ID and MHD. 43-45, 49, 50, 65, 68, 83, 110 Firstly, standardised screening for MHDs gives GPs the opportunity to consider potential mental health issues at an early stage. 44, 49 Secondly, a structured multidimensional approach in the assessment leads to more appropriate and accurate diagnosis, treatment, and referral. 44, 45, 49, 65, 68Finally, systematic and standardised medication prescriptions and reviews identify potential medication-related problems at an early stage. 43, 50, 65, 83, 110Although guidelines and instruments are available to support GPs in applying a standardised approach in the general population, they are often not adapted to patients with ID. 40, 43, 44, 72, 73, 80 Some publications covered specific guidelines for prescribing and/or monitoring medication for MHDs in patients with ID 39, 47, 49, 54, 59, 65, 67, 73, 82 and applicable tools for detecting unmet health needs in patients with ID. 31, 40, 49, 60, 69 It is suggested that GPs are insufficiently familiar with these ID-specific guidelines and tools. 51, 87Katrien Pouls sHL.indd 35 24-06-2024 16:26