due tomorrow evening 100 words each

Running head: Summary of Interdisciplinary Treatment Planning

Summary of Article: Interdisciplinary Treatment Planning

Robin Switzer

In Interdisciplinary Treatment Planning in Inpatient Setting by McLoughlin & Geller, the process, pitfalls and struggles of treatment planning is reviewed. A treatment plan model was created and components were identified to provide an overview of appropriate and ethical treatment planning.

Treatment planning needs to move ‘from a necessary, regulatory burden to an active, thoughtful endeavor” (McLoughlin & Geller, 2010 pp.263).. Guidebooks, forms and electronic software provide modern treatment plans that are standardized, formulaic, one size fits all but “will never think for the clinician” (McLoughlin & Geller, 2010 pp.264). Current treatment planning occurs in a multidisciplinary manner meaning that several different agencies create several different plans. Interdisciplinary, “when each discipline brings their perspectives and ideas to the table and the team formulates a plan together” (McLoughlin & Geller, 2010 pp.265) is preferred to eliminate confusion and cross-purposes.

Treatment Model

A treatment plan model was created including three parts, “team structure, plan content and treatment planning process” (Mcloughlin & Geller, 2010 pp.265). Structure refers to two areas, professionals included on the Core team, the team that would always be present for planning and the Extended team that may assist but is not crucial to planning purposes (McLoughlin & Geller, 2010). Professionals as part of the structure would designate a leader to coordinate efforts. It is important to clarify each member’s role, purpose and responsibilities (McLoughlin & Geller, 2010).

Plan Content

The plan content of the treatment plan includes assessment, not only assessment of the client by the professionals involved but also the client’s self-assessment. “This assessment should include how the person sees his/her problems and goals” (McLoughlin & Geller, 2010 pp.267). A review of the client’s strengths should be noted but not from a form, in a “meeting to help the patient articulate what he/she wants to accomplish” (McLoughlin & Geller, 2010 pp.268).

Diagnosis.

Diagnoses are to be included as well as discharge criteria or goal completion criteria. This includes “specific, behaviorally-worded realistic criteria” (McLoughlin & Geller, 2010 pp.268). Terminology that is vague can be detrimental to the process since each member might view progress differently (McLoughlin & Geller, 2010)

Goals.

Treatment plans should include long term and short term goals. Each “long term goal must have at least one short term goal or objective” (McLoughlin & Geller, 2010 pp.271). Goals should be written with the client’s own words and verbiage should include “I will”. Jargon must be avoided and if possible include a client’s strength within the goal. (McLoughlin & Geller, 2010). Short term goals “are the most difficult to write because the ability to measure accomplishment is the key” (McLoughlin & Geller, 2010 pp. 271). Realistic goals that should be met by the next review are to be used.

Interventions.

Interventions should be included and outline what each professional will do to assist the client toward reaching a short term goal. “There must be at least one intervention for each short term goal” (McLoughlin & Geller, 2010 pp. 272). The intervention should name the professional position responsible, how often and how long the intervention will occur for (McLoughlin & Geller, 2010).

Termination.

Termination of services should occur when all goals have been successfully met. When and what that criteria is should be in the treatment plan and should include criteria from every intervention and align with client assessment and goals. (McLoughlin & Geller, 2010).

Planning Process

“The treatment planning process is just as important …as the team needs to meet, think and develop the plan together” (McLoughlin & Geller, 2010 pp. 273). The client should be included in each meeting, and can only be excluded if they refuse or are disruptive to the point of blocking planning from occurring (McLoughlin & Geller, 2010). Written rules and coordinated planning for dates and times should occur.

Conclusion

Treatment planning that includes an interdisciplinary process and includes this treatment planning model may not be easier to accomplish but has an increased chance of assisting client’s in achieving self-assessed goals.

References

McLoughlin, K.A., & Geller, J.L., (2010). Interdisciplinary treatment planning in inpatient settings: From myth to model. Psychiatric Quarterly, 81.3, 263-77. doi: 10.1007/s11126-010-9135-1