Service profiling and outcomes benchmarking using the CORE-OM: Toward practice-based evidence in the psychological therapies.

TLDR

Effective psychological therapy requires instruments that are scientifically valid, user‑friendly, and nationally coordinated. To complement evidence‑based practice, the authors propose a core outcome measure to generate practice‑based evidence for psychological therapies. Data from 39 secondary‑care services (2,710 patients) and a single intensively evaluated service (1,455 patients) were used to report baseline severity, risk, outcome benchmarks based on reliable and clinically significant change, and basic quality‑improvement measures. The CORE‑OM was developed, found valid and reliable across multiple settings, and accepted by users, clinicians, and policymakers.

Abstract

To complement the evidence-based practice paradigm, the authors argued for a core outcome measure to provide practice-based evidence for the psychological therapies. Utility requires instruments that are acceptable scientifically, as well as to service users, and a coordinated implementation of the measure at a national level. The development of the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation-Outcome Measure (CORE-OM) is summarized. Data are presented across 39 secondary-care services (n = 2,710) and within an intensively evaluated single service (n = 1,455). Results suggest that the CORE-OM is a valid and reliable measure for multiple settings and is acceptable to users and clinicians as well as policy makers. Baseline data levels of patient presenting problem severity, including risk, are reported in addition to outcome benchmarks that use the concept of reliable and clinically significant change. Basic quality improvement in outcomes for a single service is considered.