Health Policy and Management (보건행정학회지)

Korean Academy of Health Policy and Management (한국보건행정학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Operation Status and Improvement Plan of Continuing Hospitalization Judgement System in Mental Health Review Board

정신보건심판위원회 계속입원치료 심사제도 운영현황 및 개선방안

  • Park, Sun Joo (Mental Health Research Institute, National Center for Mental Health) ;
  • Nam, Yoon Young (Division of Medical Services, National Center for Mental Health) ;
  • Hwang, Tae Yeon (Division of Public Mental Health Services, National Center for Mental Health) ;
  • Joe, Keun Ho (Division of Public Mental Health Services, National Center for Mental Health) ;
  • Yong, Jun Jin (Division of Medical Services, National Center for Mental Health) ;
  • Kim, Eun Jin (Mental Health Research Institute, National Center for Mental Health) ;
  • Kim, Chul Eung (Mental Health Research Institute, National Center for Mental Health)
  • 박선주 (국립정신건강센터 정신건강연구소) ;
  • 남윤영 (국립정신건강센터 의료부) ;
  • 황태연 (국립정신건강센터 정신건강사업부) ;
  • 조근호 (국립정신건강센터 정신건강사업부) ;
  • 전진용 (국립정신건강센터 의료부) ;
  • 김은진 (국립정신건강센터 정신건강연구소) ;
  • 김철응 (국립정신건강센터 정신건강연구소)
  • Received : 2017.06.22
  • Accepted : 2017.10.27
  • Published : 2017.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: The recent revision of South Korea's Mental Health Law emphasizes the role of the Mental Health Review Board. For this study, we examined the current status of continuing hospitalization judgement in Mental Health Review Board at the national level and aimed to determine the directions of improvement. Methods: Using a qualitative case study as the research method, we interviewed 30 Mental Health Review Board members and analyzed the results. Results: Each municipality had very different continuing hospitalization judgement methods. In our systematic review, which consisted of document inspection, we identified reliability problems due to limitations in Mental Health Review Board's operating systems, discharge orders, etc. Additionally, continuing hospitalization judgement needs to improve the objectivity, fairness, and effectiveness of their screening examinations. Conclusion: Based on the results of this study, we suggest policy proposals to improve these systems, such as standardizing examination processes, strengthening on-site inspections, increasing the independence and neutrality of judgment in Mental Health Review Board, building community mental health infrastructures, and establishing integrated management systems.

Keywords

References

  1. Chung IW, Shin CJ, Son JW, Suh TW. A study on the judgement for hospitalization of the Mental Health Judgement Boards. J Korean Neuropsychiatr Assoc 2003;42(4):520-527.
  2. Kang SK, Kwon TY. The actual conditions and improvement plan of the Mental Health Advisory Committee. Ment Health Soc Work 2008;28:297-315.
  3. Lee MS, Hong JP, Ko JA, Oh JH. Follow-up survey of discharged patients by the Mental Health Review Board. J Korean Neuropsychiatr Assoc 2009;48(1):42-47.
  4. Lee SS, O SY, Park MC. The variables affecting the judgement for counting hospitalization in patients with mentally III. J Wonkwang Med Sci 2008;23(2):107-116.
  5. Kim S, Kim YS. Assessment of continuing hospitalization judgement guideline in Mental Health Review Board. J Korean Neuropsychiatr Assoc 2011;50(6):441-449.
  6. Ministry of Health and Welfare. Continuing admission treatment standard screening guidelines. Sejong: Ministry of Health and Welfare; 2008.
  7. Ministry of Health and Welfare. 2017 mental health business guide. Sejong: Ministry of Health and Welfare; 2017.
  8. Act on the Promotion of Mental Health and Support for Welfare Services for Mentally Ill Patients Act, Law No. 14224 (May 29, 2016).
  9. Ministry of Health and Welfare, Central Mental Health Business Support Team, National Mental Health Center. The current state of the Mental Health Advisory Committee for 2014. Sejong: Ministry of Health and Welfare; 2015.
  10. Stake RE. The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications; 1995.
  11. Creswell JW, Poth CN. Qualitative inquiry research design: choosing among five approaches. 4th ed. Los Angeles (CA): Sage Publications; 2017.
  12. Stake RE. Qualitative case studies. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. Strategies of qualitative inquiry. 2nd ed. Los Angeles (CA): Sage Publications;2005. pp. 119-150.
  13. Lincoln YS, Guba EG. Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park (CA): Sage Publications; 1985.