Lost in transition or translation? Care philosophies and transitions between child and youth and adult mental health services: a systematic review.

Background: Differences in care philosophies may influence transitions from child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) to adult mental health services (AMHS). Aims: To review literature about CAMHS and AMHS care philosophies and their influence on transitions. Method: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase and CINAHL databases were searched electronically using keywords related to transitions, youth and mental disorders. Content relating to philosophies of care was searched manually. Descriptive themes were extracted and the analysis suggested four hypotheses of how care philosophies influence transitions. Results: Of the 1897 identified articles, 12 met eligibility criteria. Findings reveal consistent differences in care philosophies between CAMHS (developmental approach, involving families and nurturing) and AMHS (clinical/diagnosis-focus, emphasis on client autonomy and individual responsibility). Conclusions: Better understanding of philosophical differences and collaborative planning and service delivery may foster shared approaches in CAMHS and AMHS to better meet the needs of transitioning youth.

The transition from youth to adult mental health services and the economic impact on youth and their families.

The transition from Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) to Adult Mental Health Services (AMHS) can be challenging for youth, their families, and healthcare providers. The purpose of this study was to identify, summarize, and assess evidence found in scholarly literature regarding the economic impact on youth and their families during the transition from CAMHS to AMHS. Relevant studies were identified through a search of 7 electronic platforms. The search identified 829 articles; 5 of which met all inclusion criteria. Evidence from the included studies suggests that, when continuity of care is lacking, transitions from CAMHS to AMHS have substantial impacts on the financial demands of youth and their families. These demands are due to increases in the cost of care, loss of employment income and productivity, and changes in insurance coverage. However, there remains limited information in this area, which highlights the need for further research.

Preventing Youth from Falling Through the Cracks Between Child/Adolescent and Adult Mental Health Services: A Systematic Review of Models of Care.

Optimizing the transition between child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) and adult mental health services (AMHS) is a priority for healthcare systems. The purpose of this systematic review is to: (1) identify and compare models of care that may be used to facilitate the transition from CAMHS to AMHS; and (2) discuss trends and implications to inform future research and practice. Results identified three models of care which move beyond healthcare services and incorporate a broader range of services that better meet the dynamic needs of transition-aged youth. Joint working among providers, coupled with individualized approaches, is essential to facilitating continuity of care.

Effectiveness of Health System Services and Programs for Youth to Adult Transitions in Mental Health Care: A Systematic Review of Academic Literature.

Youth shifting to adult mental health services often report experiencing frustrations with accessing care that adequately replaces the youth services they had received. This systematic review assesses the peer reviewed evidence on services/programs aimed at addressing youth to adult transitions in mental health services. Findings suggest little data exists on the effectiveness of transition services/programs. While the available evidence supports meetings between youth and youth caseworkers prior to transitions occurring, it also verifies that this is not common practice. Other identified barriers to effective transitions were categorized as logistical (ineffective system communication), organizational (negative incentives), and related to clinical governance.

Social determinants of health and health equity policy research: exploring the use, misuse, and nonuse of policy analysis theory.

Despite a dramatic growth in SDH/HE (social determinants of health/health equity) public policy research and demonstrated government interest in promoting equity in health policies, health inequities are actually growing among some populations and there is little evidence that "healthy public policies" are being adopted and implemented. Moreover, these issues are typically failing to even reach governments' policy agendas, which is a critical step towards serious debate and the identification of policy options. This systematic review pursues three main objectives. First, is to identify barriers to SDH/HE issues reaching the government policy agenda. Second, to evaluate the characteristics of peer-reviewed research articles that utilize common policy analysis theories. And third, to determine the extent to which the SDH/HE literature utilizes common policy analysis theories. Our systematic review, conducted in June 2012, identified 6200 SDH/HE related articles in the peer-reviewed literature; however, only seven articles explicitly used a commonly recognized policy analysis theory to inform their analysis. Our analysis revealed that the SDH/HE policy literature appears to be focused on advocacy rather than analysis and that the use of policy analysis theory is extremely limited. Our results also suggest that when such theories are incorporated into an analysis they are often not comprehensively employed. We propose explanations for this non-use and misuse of policy analysis theory, and conclude that researchers may have greater influence in helping to get SDH/HE issues onto government policy agendas if they gain a greater understanding of the policy process and the value of incorporating policy analysis theories into their research. Using a policy analysis lens to help identify why healthy public policies are typically not being adopted is an important step towards moving beyond advocacy to understanding and addressing some of the political barriers to reforms.