"I have some wishes, which are actually demands." A qualitative mixed methods study on the impact of consumerism on the therapeutic relationship in mental healthcare.

IF 1.6 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Frontiers in health services Pub Date : 2024-11-22 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/frhs.2024.1388906
L T E Krikken Mulders, E H Tonkens, M J Trappenburg
{"title":"\"I have some wishes, which are actually demands.\" A qualitative mixed methods study on the impact of consumerism on the therapeutic relationship in mental healthcare.","authors":"L T E Krikken Mulders, E H Tonkens, M J Trappenburg","doi":"10.3389/frhs.2024.1388906","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Alongside the logic of care, many Western welfare states have introduced market elements or a logic of choice in their healthcare systems, which has led to consumerist behavior in patients. For the medical field, it is well documented how consumerism creates complex ethical dilemmas and undermines ways of thinking and acting crucial to healthcare. Little is known about these dynamics in mental healthcare.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study used a qualitative mixed methods design, combining 180 online patient narratives (blogs) with 25 interviews with therapists in a grounded theory approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Findings show that articulate behavior can be divided into two categories: assertive and adamant. While assertive behavior is understood as an integral, reciprocal part of therapy and is stimulated by therapists, adamant or consumerist behavior is experienced as damaging the relationship-the \"commodity\" the patient is seeking to obtain, as the single most important predictor of treatment success. Findings also show that articulate behavior in both varieties takes a different shape over time during the course of treatment.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Adamant behavior clashes with the internal logic of care, which is especially problematic in mental healthcare where the relationship with one's therapist is key to successful treatment. Therefore, patients should be taught and helped to display assertive behavior without resorting to adamancy. Individual therapists cannot achieve this alone; this endeavour should be supported by their organizations, societal beliefs about therapy and policy choices.</p>","PeriodicalId":73088,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in health services","volume":"4 ","pages":"1388906"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11621078/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in health services","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frhs.2024.1388906","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Alongside the logic of care, many Western welfare states have introduced market elements or a logic of choice in their healthcare systems, which has led to consumerist behavior in patients. For the medical field, it is well documented how consumerism creates complex ethical dilemmas and undermines ways of thinking and acting crucial to healthcare. Little is known about these dynamics in mental healthcare.

Methods: This study used a qualitative mixed methods design, combining 180 online patient narratives (blogs) with 25 interviews with therapists in a grounded theory approach.

Results: Findings show that articulate behavior can be divided into two categories: assertive and adamant. While assertive behavior is understood as an integral, reciprocal part of therapy and is stimulated by therapists, adamant or consumerist behavior is experienced as damaging the relationship-the "commodity" the patient is seeking to obtain, as the single most important predictor of treatment success. Findings also show that articulate behavior in both varieties takes a different shape over time during the course of treatment.

Discussion: Adamant behavior clashes with the internal logic of care, which is especially problematic in mental healthcare where the relationship with one's therapist is key to successful treatment. Therefore, patients should be taught and helped to display assertive behavior without resorting to adamancy. Individual therapists cannot achieve this alone; this endeavour should be supported by their organizations, societal beliefs about therapy and policy choices.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“我有一些愿望,实际上是要求。”消费主义对心理健康治疗关系影响的质性混合方法研究。
导言:除了护理逻辑,许多西方福利国家还在其医疗保健系统中引入了市场元素或选择逻辑,这导致了病人的消费主义行为。在医疗领域,消费主义如何造成复杂的道德困境,如何破坏对医疗保健至关重要的思维和行为方式,都有大量的文献记载。但人们对精神医疗保健领域的这些动态却知之甚少:本研究采用了定性混合方法设计,将 180 篇在线患者叙述(博客)与 25 篇治疗师访谈相结合,并采用了基础理论方法:结果:研究结果表明,表达行为可分为两类:自信和强硬。坚定的行为被理解为治疗中不可或缺的互惠部分,并受到治疗师的激励,而强硬或消费主义行为则被认为破坏了治疗关系--患者试图获得的 "商品",是治疗成功的最重要的预测因素。研究结果还显示,在治疗过程中,这两种行为的表达方式会随着时间的推移而呈现出不同的形态:讨论:言辞激烈的行为与护理的内在逻辑相冲突,这在心理健康护理中尤其成问题,因为与治疗师的关系是治疗成功的关键。因此,应该教导并帮助患者在不诉诸强硬的情况下表现出自信的行为。治疗师个人无法单独做到这一点;他们的组织、社会对治疗的看法以及政策选择都应支持这一努力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
What is improvement science, and what makes it different? An outline of the field and its frontiers. Improving the health of the rural population in India through bundling WASH practices. Patient-reported outcome measures to deliver patient and family-centered care in pediatrics: the ball is now in our court. The power and pain of words: how language matters in responding to patients after harm. The impact of centralization on structural changes in healthcare: when it works.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1