Brain and Mind Centre, University of Sydney, Level 4, 94 Mallett Street, Sydney, NSW 2050, Australia.
Mental Health Policy Unit, Health Research Institute, Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT 2617, Australia.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Apr 15;19(8):4808. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19084808.
Monitoring and reporting mental health is complex. Australia's first National Mental Health Strategy in 1992 included a new national commitment to accountability and data collection in mental health. This article provides a narrative review of thirty years of experience.
This review considers key documents, policies, plans and strategies in relation to the evolution of mental health data and reporting. Documents produced by the Federal and the eight state and territory governments are considered, as well as publications produced by key information agencies, statutory authorities and others. A review of this literature demonstrates both its abundance and limitations.
Australia's approach to mental health reporting is characterised by duplication and a lack of clarity. The data available fail to do justice to the mental health services provided in Australia. Mental health data collection and reporting processes are centrally driven, top-down and activity-focused, largely eschewing actual health outcomes, the social determinants of mental health. There is little, if any, link to clearly identifiable service user or carer priorities. Consequently, it is difficult to link this process longitudinally to clinical or systemic quality improvement. Initial links between the focus of national reform efforts and mental health data collection were evident, but these links have weakened over time. Changes to governance and reporting, including under COVID, have made the task of delivering accountability for mental health more difficult.
Australia's current approach is not fit for purpose. It is at a pivotal point in mental health reform, with new capacity to use modelled data to simulate prospective mental health reform options. By drawing on these new techniques and learning the lessons of the past, Australia (and other nations) can design and implement more effective systems of planning, reporting and accountability for mental health.
监测和报告心理健康状况较为复杂。1992 年，澳大利亚发布首个国家心理健康战略，其中包含新的国家承诺，即对心理健康领域的问责制和数据收集工作负责。本文对 30 年来的经验进行了叙述性回顾。
本综述考虑了与精神卫生数据和报告演变相关的关键文件、政策、计划和战略。联邦和八个州及地区政府发布的文件，以及关键信息机构、法定机构和其他机构发布的出版物都在考虑范围内。对这些文献的回顾既展示了其丰富性，也展示了其局限性。
澳大利亚的精神卫生报告方法具有重复和缺乏清晰度的特点。现有的数据没有公正地反映澳大利亚提供的精神卫生服务。精神卫生数据收集和报告流程由中央主导，自上而下，以活动为重点，主要回避实际的健康结果和精神健康的社会决定因素。几乎没有（如果有的话）与明确可识别的服务使用者或照顾者重点相关联。因此，很难将此过程与临床或系统质量改进进行纵向联系。国家改革工作重点与精神卫生数据收集之间的初步联系是明显的，但随着时间的推移，这种联系已经减弱。治理和报告的变化，包括在新冠疫情期间的变化，使得为精神卫生提供问责制的任务更加困难。
澳大利亚目前的方法不适用。它正处于精神卫生改革的关键时刻，有新的能力使用模型数据来模拟未来的精神卫生改革方案。通过借鉴这些新技术并吸取过去的经验教训，澳大利亚（和其他国家）可以设计和实施更有效的精神卫生规划、报告和问责制系统。
