RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Australian mental health policy aims to introduce evidence-based practice within a community care approach. This aim requires reliable measures that can be used by a wide variety of professionals. The interrater reliability of the Camberwell Assessment of Need Short Appraisal Schedule (CANSAS) was assessed under routine conditions. METHOD: Three interviewer-observer dyads assessed the needs of 14 inpatients and 18 day patients of a psychiatric rehabilitation unit in New South Wales, Australia. RESULTS: Agreement on the identification of an area of need was high. However, agreement was higher on patient ratings than on staff ratings. Correlations on staff ratings of met needs were also moderate (r = 0.53), suggesting discrepancies in rating the level of need. CONCLUSION: Differences in staff ratings may be attributed to ambiguity in the definition of need and levels of need and/or the sources of information used by the rater making the assessment. An approach to establishing an operational definition of need is suggested, and an increase in the number of levels of need is recommended. Implications for Australian mental health policy are noted.
