Eliminating The Wait For Mental Health Services
Abstract
Timely access to mental health services is critical to successful treatment of adults with severe and persistent mental illness, and timeliness is a key quality indicator in calls for improvement to the health care system. Waiting weeks for a psychiatric appointment results in increased psychiatric hospitalizations, decompensation, and risk for suicide. However, many community mental health administrators assume that waiting lists for services are inevitable given the high demand for services. The present study evaluates the successful efforts of a large urban community mental health center to eliminate the wait for psychiatric services in an adult outpatient setting. Through systematic changes in the service delivery system, the wait time for a psychiatric appointment was reduced from 13 days to 0 days, and the no-show rate dropped from 52 to 18%. Furthermore, these changes were associated with reduced psychiatric hospitalizations and improved staff morale and teamwork. The change processes implemented can be successfully applied to other systems problems confronting mental health agencies.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Failure to access the right support at the right time can lead to a worsening of symptoms, comorbidities, and adverse outcomes, including hospitalization or suicide.
“Referral to the appropriate healthcare service is a pivotal point in the treatment pathway, as failure to access the right support at the right time can lead to a worsening of symptoms, comorbidities, and adverse outcomes, including hospitalization or suicide [Williams et al., 2008, Reichert and Jacobs, 2018, De Girolamo et al., 2012].”
From Closing the accessibility gap to mental health treatment with a personalized self-referral chatbot (2024) · cites this paper as Williams et al., 2008
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 16 · Cited by 107
- Authors
- Williams, M. E., Latta, J., & Conversano, P.
- Affiliations
- University of Southern California (US)
- Didi Hirsch Mental Health Services (US)
- Children's Hospital Los Angeles (US)
- Corresponding author
- Williams, Marian E.
- ORCID
- Williams, Marian E.
- Venue
- The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research
- Published
- 2007-11-02
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 107-114
- ISSN
- 1094-3412 (ISSN-L)
- 1556-3308
- OpenAlex
- W2009669643
- Cited by
- 107
- References
- 16
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 2.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Healthcare Operations and Scheduling Optimization
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Quality and Management
- Keywords
- waiting time, severe and persistent mental illness, community mental health centers, outpatient mental health services, no-show rates, psychiatric hospitalization, decompensation, suicide risk, service delivery reform, employee morale, teamwork, urban mental health services
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Ambulatory Care, Community Mental Health Services, Health Services Needs and Demand, Humans, Quality Assurance, Health Care, United States, Waiting Lists, Efficiency, Organizational, Urban Health Services
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
