scholarly journals Service user and carer involvement in mental health care safety: raising concerns and improving the safety of services

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn Berzins ◽  
Gemma Louch ◽  
Mark Brown ◽  
Jane K. O’Hara ◽  
John Baker
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 237-247
Author(s):  
Matthew Sydney Long

Purpose This paper aims to contribute to the debate about the closure of institutional mental health-care facilities, from an experiential perspective of a former mental health inpatient, ongoing service user and campaigner for retention of such facilities. It argues that auto-ethnographic accounts of mental illness by those with multiple social identities can have a greater role in terms of future training of mental health-care professionals. Design/methodology/approach The paper offers an experiential account of the impact of mental health facility bed closures as a patient admitted to institutional mental health facilities; as a mental health campaigner, fighting for the provision of both places of safety and “safe space” within his own local community; and as an ongoing service user. The research is in the interpretivist tradition of social science in taking an auto-ethnographical methodological stance. Findings This paper is underpinned by two key theoretical notions. Firstly, Stuart Hall’s concept of the Familiar Stranger (2017) is used to explore the tensions of self-identity as the author SHIFTS uncomfortably between his three-fold statuses. Secondly, the notion of “ontological insecurity” offered by Giddens (1991) is used with the paper exploring the paradox that admission to a mental health facility so-called “place of safety” is in fact itself a disorientating experience for both patient and carer(s). Research limitations/implications No positivistic claims to reliability, representativeness or generalisability can be made. It is the authenticity of the account which the reader feels should be afforded primacy in terms of its original contribution to knowledge. Practical implications This paper should have practical use for those tasked with developing educational and training curriculums for professionals across the mental health-care sector. Social implications This paper implicitly assesses the political wisdom of the policy of mental health bed closures within the wider context of the deinstitutionalisation movement. Originality/value This paper is underpinned by original experiential accounts from the author as patient, campaigner for places of safety and onging service-user of mental health care provision.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. e0248316
Author(s):  
Luke Sheridan Rains ◽  
Athena Echave ◽  
Jessica Rees ◽  
Hannah Rachel Scott ◽  
Billie Lever Taylor ◽  
...  

Background There is a recognised need to develop clear service models and pathways to provide high quality care in the community for people with complex emotional needs, who may have been given a “personality disorder” diagnosis. Services should be informed by the views of people with these experiences. Aims To identify and synthesise qualitative studies on service user experiences of community mental health care for Complex Emotional Needs. Methods We searched six bibliographic databases for papers published since 2003. We included peer reviewed studies reporting data on service user experiences and views about good care from community-based mental health services for adults with CEN, including generic mental health services and specialist “personality disorder” services. Studies using any qualitative method were included and thematic synthesis used to identify over-arching themes. Results Forty-seven papers were included. Main themes were: 1) The need for a long-term perspective on treatment journeys; 2) The need for individualised and holistic care; 3) Large variations in accessibility and quality of mental health services; 4) The centrality of therapeutic relationships; 5) Impacts of ‘personality disorder’ diagnosis. Themes tended to recur across studies from different countries and years. Discussion Recurrent major themes included wanting support that is individualised and holistic, provides continuity over long journeys towards recovery, and that is delivered by empathetic and well-informed clinicians who are hopeful but realistic about the prospects of treatment. Care that met these simple and clearly stated priorities tended to be restricted to often limited periods of treatment by specialist “personality disorder” services: generic and primary care services were often reported as far from adequate. There is an urgent need to co-design and test strategies for improving long-term support and treatment care for people with “personality disorders” throughout the mental health care system.


2015 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-221 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha L. Millar ◽  
Mary Chambers ◽  
Melanie Giles

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rolf Sundet ◽  
Hesook Suzie Kim ◽  
Bengt Karlsson ◽  
Marit Borg ◽  
Knut Tore Sælør ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Various models for collaborative practice in mental health care incorporating the perspectives of service-user participation and collaboration in the care have been developed. However, the emphasis in these practice models has not been on identifying specific features of “how” collaboration and service-user participation can occur and be nurtured. This suggests a need for a collaborative practice model that specifies essential strategies operationalizing the tenets of service-user participation and collaboration applicable in mental health and substance abuse (MHSA) care. Methods A double helix approach of coalescing theoretical ideas and empirical findings to develop a practice model that is applicable in MHSA practice. A theoretical analysis is carried out to identify the critical, foundational elements for collaborative practice in MHSA practice, and has identified the philosophical-theoretical orientations of Habermas’ theory of communicative action, Bakhtin’s dialogicality, and the philosophy of personhood as the foundational features of collaboration. This base is juxtaposed with the results of a qualitative meta-analysis of 18 empirical articles on collaboration in MHSA to advance a collaborative practice model specifically in the domain of service user/professional collaboration.Results “The collaborative, dialogue-based clinical practice model” (CDCP Model) for community mental health care is proposed, within the structure of four main components. The first specifies the framework for practice that includes person-centered care, recovery-orientation, and a pluralistic orientation and the second identifies the domains of collaboration as service user/professional collaboration, inter-professional collaboration, and service sector collaboration. The third identifies self-understanding, mutual understanding, and shared decision-making as the essential principles of collaboration. The fourth specifies interactive-dialogic processes, negotiated-participatory engagement processes, and negotiated-supportive processes as the essential strategies of collaboration applicable in service user/professional collaboration which were extracted in the empirical work. An illustration of the CDCP Model in a clinical case is given.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rolf Sundet ◽  
Hesook Suzie Kim ◽  
Bengt Karlsson ◽  
Marit Borg ◽  
Knut Tore Sælør ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Various models for collaborative practice in mental health care incorporating the perspectives of service-user participation and collaboration in the care have been developed. However, the emphasis in these practice models has not been on identifying specific features of “how” collaboration and service-user participation can occur and be nurtured. This suggests a need for a collaborative practice model that specifies essential strategies operationalizing the tenets of service-user participation and collaboration applicable in mental health and substance abuse (MHSA) care. Methods A double helix approach of coalescing theoretical ideas and empirical findings to develop a practice model that is applicable in MHSA practice. A theoretical analysis is carried out to identify the critical, foundational elements for collaborative practice in MHSA practice, and has identified the philosophical-theoretical orientations of Habermas’ theory of communicative action, Bakhtin’s dialogicality, and the philosophy of personhood as the foundational features of collaboration. This base is juxtaposed with the results of a qualitative meta-analysis of 18 empirical articles on collaboration in MHSA to advance a collaborative practice model specifically in the domain of service user/professional collaboration. Results “The collaborative, dialogue-based clinical practice model” (CDCP Model) for community mental health care is proposed, within the structure of four main components. The first specifies the framework for practice that includes person-centered care, recovery-orientation, and a pluralistic orientation and the second identifies the domains of collaboration as service user/professional collaboration, inter-professional collaboration, and service sector collaboration. The third identifies self-understanding, mutual understanding, and shared decision-making as the essential principles of collaboration. The fourth specifies interactive-dialogic processes, negotiated-participatory engagement processes, and negotiated-supportive processes as the essential strategies of collaboration applicable in service user/professional collaboration which were extracted in the empirical work. An illustration of the CDCP Model in a clinical case is given.Conclusions The CDCP Model presented fills the gap that exists in the field of community MHSA practice regarding how to operationalize systematically the tenets of person-centeredness, recovery-oriented, and pluralism-oriented practice in terms of user/professional collaboration.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luke Sheridan Rains ◽  
Athena Echave ◽  
Jessica Rees ◽  
Hannah Rachel Scott ◽  
Billie Lever-Taylor ◽  
...  

AbstractBackgroundThere is a recognised need to develop clear service models and pathways to provide high quality care in the community for people with complex emotional needs, who may have been given a “personality disorder” diagnosis. Services should be informed by the views of people with these experiences.AimsTo systematically review and synthesise qualitative studies on service user experiences of community mental health care for Complex Emotional Needs.MethodsWe searched six bibliographic databases for papers published since 2003. We included peer reviewed studies reporting data on service user experiences and views about good care from community-based mental health services for adults with CEN, including generic mental health services and specialist “personality disorder” services. Studies using any qualitative method were included and thematic synthesis used to identify over-arching themes.ResultsForty-seven papers were included. Main themes were: 1) The need for a long-term perspective on treatment journeys; 2) The need for individualised and holistic care; 3) Large variations in accessibility and quality of mental health services; 4) The centrality of therapeutic relationships; 5) Impacts of ‘personality disorder’ diagnosis. Themes tended to recur across studies from different countries and years.DiscussionRecurrent major themes included wanting support that is individualised and holistic, provides continuity over long journeys towards recovery, and that is delivered by empathetic and well-informed clinicians who are hopeful but realistic about the prospects of treatment. Care that met these simple and clearly stated priorities tended to be restricted to often limited periods of treatment by specialist “personality disorder” services: generic and primary care services were often reported as far from adequate. There is an urgent need to co-design and test strategies for improving long-term support and treatment care for people with “personality disorders” throughout the mental health care system.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document