Mental Health Recovery Star is a multifaceted 10-item outcomes measure and key-working tool that has been widely adopted by service providers in the UK. We aimed to explore its factorial validity, internal consistency and responsiveness. Recovery Star readings were conducted twice with 203 working-age adults with moderate to severe mental health problems attending a range of mental health services, and a third time with 113 of these individuals.

Mental Health Recovery Star had high internal consistency and appeared to measure an underlying recovery-oriented construct. Results supported a valid two-factor structure which explained 48% of variance in Recovery Star ratings data. Two Recovery Star items (‘relationships’ and ‘addictive behaviour’) did not load onto either factor. There was good statistically significant item responsiveness, and no obvious item redundancy. Data for a small number of variables were not normally distributed and the implications of this are discussed.

Recovery Star has been received enthusiastically by both mental health service providers and service users. This study provides further evidence for its adoption in recovery-focused mental health services and indicates that items relating to addictive behaviour, responsibilities and work could be further developed in future.

To select staff for a personality disorder service by exposing applicants to anticipated challenges. Applicants took part in a role play, an unstructured group with fellow applicants and numbers of the interviewing panel, and a panel interview. A service user representative was involved from the initial planning stage.

Multiple assessment methods enabled fine discrimination between applicants. Appointed staff said they felt the interviews were a valid test of required skills and have been well regarded by patients in the programme.

Selecting staff for a personality disorder service benefits from using multiple interview methods. The service user representative and role-play actor can contribute crucially by representing the patient's perspective. Key domains to assess include the applicant's psychological qualities, psychiatric skills and ability to work in a team.

The literature on the use of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in patients with an intellectual disability is scarce, despite a higher prevalence of psychiatric disorders than in the general adult population. We carried out a review of articles published before March 2010. All age ranges, severity of disability and diagnoses were included.

We found 72 case reports, a retrospective chart review study and other reviews, but no controlled studies. Most patients (79%) showed a positive outcome following ECT. Complications were seen only in 13% and there were no reports of cognitive decline. Many patients relapsed following ECT (32%) and the majority were maintained with medication at follow-up (71%).

Electroconvulsive therapy is a valuable treatment for this patient group and should be considered earlier as opposed to as a last resort. Obstacles to its use include diagnostic difficulties, ethical and legal issues, a lack of objective measurements and uncertainty about its safety in this population.

We examine the feasibility of the routine use of three patient-reported and one clinician-rated outcome measures (patient-identified problem, EuroQol-5D questionnaire, EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale and Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS)) in an out-patient community psychiatric service, and discuss the associations between these variables.

The routine collection of outcome measures was feasible in the out-patient setting. There was a general improvement in the health status from the initial assessment to the first follow-up. Subsequent scores remained stable.

The study encourages the practical use of scales in routine community psychiatric practice. As there was correlation between HoNOS and EQ-5D index, both need not be used in routine practice.

We report an audit of the provision of psychiatric postgraduate education within the foundation programme and psychiatry specialty programmes in the UK. Our primary measure was the number of foundation posts in psychiatry. Our audit standard was that all foundation doctors should receive programmed training in psychiatry via a psychiatry foundation post.

We found a total of 413 foundation posts in psychiatry in 21 out of 22 foundation schools in England. This figure is only a fifth of that required to meet the audit standard. There is training capacity for 500 core trainees and 460 higher trainees in psychiatry per year. Currently, 13.6% of specialists other than general practitioners on the General Medical Council registers are psychiatrists.

The provision of programmed postgraduate training in psychiatry in UK foundation schools is inadequate. The training needs of all doctors, the mental healthcare needs of all patients, and recruitment to psychiatry are all likely to suffer as a consequence.

To gather opinion from trainees across England about their current experiences and future career plans. This was done via an internet-based survey.

Out of the 359 responses we received, 65.8% of trainees planned to stay in psychiatry until retirement. Trainees felt several issues were problematic, including the attitude of other specialties towards psychiatry, perceived substandard treatment of psychiatric patients by other specialties and implications of New Ways of Working.

Despite there being many areas of training respondents were happy with, if attrition is to be minimised, issues such as how psychiatric trainees integrate with the other medical specialties and how the role of doctors in the specialty is perceived need to be addressed.