scholarly journals Models of Mental Health Problems: A Systematic Review of Theoretical Approaches

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dirk Richter ◽  
Jeremy Dixon

Background Mental health and mental illness have been contested concepts for decades, with a wide variety of models of mental health problems being proposed. To date, there has been no exhaustive review which provides an overview of existing models.Methods We conducted a systematic review of theoretical models of mental health problems. We searched academic databases, reference lists and an electronic bookshop for literature that proposed, endorsed, reviewed or critiqued such models. Papers, book chapters and books were included with material by researchers, clinicians, non-medical professions and service users writing between 2000 to June 2020 being considered. A quality appraisal could not be provided due to the theoretical content of publications. The study was registered with the Open Science Framework (No. osf.io/r3tjx). FindingsOn the basis of 110 publications we identified 34 different models which were grouped into five broader categories. Many models aimed to bridge two or more categories. Biological and psychological approaches had the largest number of models while social, consumer and cultural models were less diversified. InterpretationIn addition to established theories, we found a large number of new theoretical approaches, most stemming from academic fields. From an epistemological perspective, we could not find criteria that advance scientific models over non-scientific approaches, identifying the need for approaches by non-medical professionals and service users to be considered. Due to the non-empirical nature of the publications, several limitations in terms of search and quality appraisal apply.

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Norha Vera San Juan ◽  
Petra C. Gronholm ◽  
Margaret Heslin ◽  
Vanessa Lawrence ◽  
Matthew Bain ◽  
...  

Introduction: The recovery approach aims to have users' perspectives at the heart of service development and research; it is a holistic perspective that considers social needs, personal growth and inclusion. In the last decade recovery-oriented research and practice has increased greatly, however, a comprehensive model of recovery considering exclusively the perspectives of people with lived experience has not been devised.Aims: This review aimed to develop a framework and contextualize service users' and informal caregivers' understanding of recovery from severe mental health problems.Methods: We systematically searched 6 databases including key terms related to knowledge, experience and narratives AND mental health AND personal recovery. The search was supplemented with reference sourcing through gray literature, reference tracking and expert consultation. Data analysis consisted of a qualitative meta-synthesis using constant comparative methods.Results: Sixty-two studies were analyzed. A pattern emerged regarding the recovery paradigms that the studies used to frame their findings. The resulting recovery framework included the domains Social recovery; Prosperity (Legal, political, and economic recovery); Individual Recovery; and Clinical Recovery Experience (SPICE). Service users' definitions of recovery tended to prioritize social aspects, particularly being accepted and connecting with others, while caregivers focused instead on clinical definitions of recovery such as symptom remission. Both groups emphasized individual aspects such as becoming self-sufficient and achieving personal goals, which was strongly linked with having economic means for independence.Conclusions: The recovery model provided by this review offers a template for further research in the field and a guide for policy and practice. Predominant definitions of recovery currently reflect understandings of mental health which focus on an individual perspective, while this review found an important emphasis on socio-political aspects. At the same time, only a small number of studies took place in low-income countries, focused on minoritized populations, or included caregivers' perspectives. These are important gaps in the literature that require further attention.Systematic Review Registration: The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42017076450); https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=76450.


Work ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Annika Lexén ◽  
Maria Emmelin ◽  
Lars Hansson ◽  
Bengt Svensson ◽  
Susann Porter ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND: Lack of mental health literacy among rehabilitation professionals and employers in the return-to-work of persons with mental health problems resulted in the development of a three-day group training program, the Support to Employers from rehabilitation Actors about Mental health (SEAM) intervention. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of SEAM on rehabilitation professionals’ knowledge and beliefs, attitudes, and supporting behaviors towards people with mental health problems and employers as part of the return-to-work process. METHODS: In this longitudinal study, 94 rehabilitation professionals were included. Data were collected prior to (T1), immediately after (T2) and 6 months after SEAM training (T3) using knowledge and attitude scales and a questionnaire on supporting behaviors. SEAM includes training in Mental Health First Aid, presentations and discussions on current research on work and mental health, and strategies and communication guidelines to use when meeting service users and employers as part of the return-to-work of persons with mental health problems. SEAM also includes a homepage with targeted employer information. Data were analyzed using non-parametric statistics. RESULTS: SEAM significantly increased rehabilitation professionals’ knowledge of mental health (T1-T2: z = –2.037, p = 0.042; T2-T3: z = –5.093, p = 0.001), and improved their attitudes towards persons with mental health problems (T1-T2: z = 4.984, p = 0.001). Professionals (50–60%) also estimated that they had increased their use of supporting strategies towards service users and employers. CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests that SEAM can increase mental health literacy among rehabilitation professionals and lead to a greater focus on service users’ resources and work ability, as well as on employers’ support needs.


Author(s):  
Andrew Beck

AbstractExperiences of racism can be a cumulative risk factor for developing mental health problems. Cognitive Behaviour Therapists working with Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) service users should be confident in their ability to establish the necessary rapport to ask about these experiences and be able to incorporate this information into longitudinal formulations and as part of maintenance cycles. This paper sets out guidelines as to how to do this as part of a wider engagement process.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document