HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS Psychiatric Bulletin Advances in Psychiatric Treatment All RCPsych Journals		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit an eLetter Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Barkham, M. Articles by Twigg, E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Barkham, M. Articles by Twigg, E.

Suitability and utility of the CORE-OM and CORE-A for assessing severity of presenting problems in psychological therapy services based in primary and secondary care settings

Psychological Therapies Research Centre, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK

Correspondence: Professor Michael Barkham, Psychological Therapies Research Centre, 17 Blenheim Terrace, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK. E-mail: m.barkham{at}leeds.ac.uk

Declaration of interest M.B. received funding from the Mental Health Foundation and the Artemis Trust to support the development of the CORE-OM and CORE-A, respectively.

Background There is a need for reliable assessment tools that are suitable for the counselling and the psychological therapy services in primary and secondary care settings.

Aims To test the suitability and utility of the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation - Outcome Measure (CORE-OM) and CORE-Assessment (CORE-A) assessment tools.

Method Service intake data were analysed from counselling and psychological therapy services in 32 primary care settings and 17 secondary care settings.

Results Completion rates exceeded 98% in both of the settings sampled. Intake severity levels were similar but secondary care patients were more likely to score above the risk cut-off and the severe threshold and to have experienced their problems for a greater duration.

Conclusions The CORE-OM and CORE-A are suitable assessment tools that show small but logical differences between psychological therapy services in primary- and secondary-based care.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. CONNELL, M. BARKHAM, W. B. STILES, E. TWIGG, N. SINGLETON, O. EVANS, and J. N. V. MILES Distribution of CORE-OM scores in a general population, clinical cut-off points and comparison with the CIS-R The British Journal of Psychiatry, January 1, 2007; 190(1): 69 - 74. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Leach, M. Lucock, M. Barkham, R. Noble, L. Clarke, and S. Iveson Assessing risk and emotional disturbance using the CORE-OM and HoNOS outcome measures at the interface between primary and secondary mental healthcare Psychiatr. Bull., November 1, 2005; 29(11): 419 - 422. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]