Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by HUXLEY, P.
Right arrow Articles by TOLLEY, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© British Association of Social Workers

The Psychiatric ‘Caseness’ of Clients Referred to an Urban Social Services Department

PETER HUXLEY, JACQUELINE KORER and SHEILA TOLLEY

Peter Huxley is Senior Lecturer in Psychiatric Social Work in the Department of Psychiatry at Manchester University and Director of the Mental Health Social Work Research Unit. He is the author of Social Work Practice in Mental Health (Gower, 1985) and Mental Illness in the Community (with David Goldberg; Tavistock, 1980).

Jacqueline Korer is a Research Associate in the Mental Health Social Work Research and Staff Development Unit in the Department of Psychiatry, Manchester University. She has published several papers describing her previous research.

Sheila Tolley is a Research Officer for the Housing Department, Manchester City Council. She is also a part-time MA student (Applied Social Research) at Manchester University.

Correspondence should be sent to Dr. Peter Huxley, Mental Health Social Work Research Unit, Department of Psychiatry, Manchester University, Stopford Building, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PT.

Summary

Of 158 clients referred to two area offices and six general practice attached social workers, 141 weré interviewed using standardized social and psychiatric research interviews. The General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) was completed by 138 clients. Their social worker completed the Case Review Form. Scores of 5 or more on the PSE Index of Definition (for the client) were used to indicate psychiatric caseness. Using ID scores of 5 or more, 53% of the sample were identified as ‘cases’. The GHQ (cut-off 4/5) identified 73% of the clients as cases; and the GHQ (cut-off 10/11) identified 51% cases.

Morbidity was significantly greater in the general practice setting. Social workers' judgement (about the presence or absence of mental illness/emotional disorder) was not significantly better than chance in the identification of specific disorders, but was significant in relation to the whole sample.

The results are discussed and further studies are being conducted using more sophisticated judgements of ’caseness’, and extending the enquiry beyond an inner city population.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.