Patterns of use of mental health crisis-related services in the English NHS: a retrospective observational study

BackgroundImproving access to high-quality community-based crisis care and reducing inpatient admissions are key policy objectives in England, yet evidence on who uses crisis-related services and potential inequalities in access remains limited. AimsTo examine socio-demographic patterns in the use of six crisis-related services in England: 1) Crisis phonelines; 2) Crisis cafes; 3) Crisis Resolution and Home Treatment teams (CRHTs); 4) Voluntary inpatient admissions; 5) Compulsory inpatient admissions under the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA); and 6) conveyance to a Place of Safety (PoS) by police under section 136 of the MHA. MethodWe conducted a retrospective observational study using the Mental Health Services Data Set between 2021/22 and 2023/24. Adults (aged 18+) using any of the six services were included. A multinomial logit regression model was used to estimate the average marginal effects for age, sex, ethnicity, and area-level deprivation, with robust patient-level standard errors and year fixed-effects. ResultsWithin this population using any crisis-related services, adjusted analysis showed people from several ethnic minority backgrounds were more likely to be compulsorily detained or brought to a PoS by police, and less likely to use CRHTs than White individuals, with largest disparities in compulsory admissions for Black (+15.0 percentage points [pp]) and Asian (+7.3 pp) groups. Compulsory admissions were more common among older adults and men (+1.5 pp). Crisis phonelines were less commonly used by older adults, men (-4.8 pp), and people from Black (-15.6 pp) and Asian (-4.7 pp) backgrounds. Crisis cafes showed more even demographic distributions. Although adjusted differences by deprivation were small (all <1.0 pp), over half of all users lived in the two most deprived quintiles. ConclusionsAmong crisis-related service users, demographic groups at greater risk of coercive care are less likely to access community crisis services. Addressing these disparities could improve access and reduce inequalities.