An evaluation of an Australian initiative designed to improve interdisciplinary collaboration in primary mental health care Justine Fletcher a, *, Kylie King a , Jo Christo a , Anna Machlin a , Bridget Bassilios a , Grant Blashki b , Chris Gibbs c , Angela Nicholas c , Jane Pirkis a a Centre for Health Policy, Programs and Economics, Melbourne School of Population Health, University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia b Nossal Institute for Global Health, University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia c Mental Health Professionals Network, PO Box 203, Flinders Lane, Victoria 8009, Australia 1. Introduction Twenty percent of the Australian population will experience mental ill health each year (ABS, 2007), and mental disorders account for 24.9% of the disability burden in Australia (Begg et al., 2007). This high prevalence of mental disorders is echoed in other high income countries: the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that 25% of US adults have a mental illness each year (CDC, 2011), and the Mental Health Foundation estimates a similar prevalence rate for the UK (Mental Health Foundation, 2007). Research has established the benefit of including psychological interventions in primary care treatment of common mental disorders (Gilbody, Bower, Fletcher, Richards, & Sutton, 2006), and primary mental health care is an essential component of mental health care provision in Australia. General practitioners, in particular, frequently provide an entry point into mental health care for high prevalence mental health disorders, creating the potential for early detection of mental disorders and appropriate referral pathways for ongoing care. Relevant to the provision of mental health services within the primary care sector is the growing evidence that collaborative mental health care further enhances treatment and is best practice (D’Amour, Ferrada-Videla, San Martin Rodriguez, & Beaulieu, 2005; Rosenberg & Hickie, 2009). Collaborative mental health care involves not only the input of a number of different mental health care professionals in the care of a consumer, but also involves these professionals communicating and working together in collective action oriented towards a common goal (D’Amour et al., 2005). A recent review of 119 papers found strong evidence for the link between collabora- tive activities, positive clinical service delivery and economic outcomes (Fuller et al., 2011). Similarly, other researchers have found positive consumer impacts (van Orden, Hoffman, Haffmans, Spinhoven, & Hoencamp, 2009; Zwarenstein, Reeves, & Perrier, 2005). Since the early 1990s, Australian National Mental Health Plans have emphasised the importance of joint planning, coordination of services and the development of links between providers across and within sectors in the delivery of mental health services. The Evaluation and Program Planning 45 (2014) 29–41 A R T I C L E I N F O Article history: Received 20 December 2011 Received in revised form 23 February 2014 Accepted 1 March 2014 Available online 11 March 2014 Keywords: Interdisciplinary network Mental health Collaborative care Primary care A B S T R A C T This paper reports on a multi-component evaluation of Australia’s Mental Health Professionals Network (MHPN). MHPN aims to improve consumer outcomes by fostering a collaborative clinical approach to primary mental health care. MHPN has promoted interdisciplinary communication and networking through activity in three inter-related areas: interdisciplinary workshops supported by education and training materials; fostering ongoing, self-sustained interdisciplinary clinical networks; and a website, web portal (MHPN Online) and a toll-free telephone information line. The evaluation showed that MHPN’s workshops were highly successful; almost 1200 workshops were attended by 11,930 individuals from a range of mental health professions. Participants from 81% of these workshops have gone on to join ongoing, interdisciplinary networks of local providers, and MHPN is now supporting these networks in a range of innovative ways to encourage them to become self-sustaining and to improve collaborative care practices. ß 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. * Corresponding author. Tel.: +61 38344 0663; fax: +61 39348 1174. E-mail addresses: justine.fletcher@unimelb.edu.au (J. Fletcher), k.king@unimelb.edu.au (K. King), jchristo@unimelb.edu.au (J. Christo), amachlin@unimelb.edu.au (A. Machlin), b.bassilios@unimelb.edu.au (B. Bassilios), gblashki@unimelb.edu.au (G. Blashki), c.gibbs@mhpn.org.au (C. Gibbs), angnic12@hotmail.com (A. Nicholas), j.pirkis@unimelb.edu.au (J. Pirkis). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Evaluation and Program Planning jo ur n al ho m ep ag e: www .els evier .c om /lo cat e/evalp r og p lan http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2014.03.002 0149-7189/ß 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.