User participation in decision-making – a qualitative intervention study on mental health professionals’ experiences

IF 1.6 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Journal of Public Mental Health Pub Date : 2022-07-14 DOI:10.1108/jpmh-11-2021-0140
Maria Bendtsen Kronkvist, K. Forsberg, M. Rämgård, M. Sandlund, Tove Janarv, P. Dahlqvist Jönsson
{"title":"User participation in decision-making – a qualitative intervention study on mental health professionals’ experiences","authors":"Maria Bendtsen Kronkvist, K. Forsberg, M. Rämgård, M. Sandlund, Tove Janarv, P. Dahlqvist Jönsson","doi":"10.1108/jpmh-11-2021-0140","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThe purpose of this study was to describe mental health professionals’ experiences of changes in attitudes towards, and knowledge about, users of mental health-care recovery and decisional participation in clinical practice after an educational intervention.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nUsers of mental health care want to participate in decisions regarding their own mental health care. Shared decision-making as a method is coherent with recovery orientation in mental health services and results in better-informed patients and fewer conflicts regarding decisions. A qualitative intervention study was designed to evaluate changes in attitudes and knowledge about mental health recovery in Sweden. Nine participants were interviewed, and the data were analysed by content analysis.\n\n\nFindings\nThree categories were generated from the analysis: Increased theoretical knowledge, changing attitudes about practical approaches and the significance of social factors in recovery.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nWhen shared decision-making is to be implemented in mental health, professionals need to gain knowledge about recovery and need to adopt changed roles as health professionals. Educational interventions therefore seem necessary if such changes are to happen.\n","PeriodicalId":45601,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Mental Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Mental Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jpmh-11-2021-0140","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study was to describe mental health professionals’ experiences of changes in attitudes towards, and knowledge about, users of mental health-care recovery and decisional participation in clinical practice after an educational intervention. Design/methodology/approach Users of mental health care want to participate in decisions regarding their own mental health care. Shared decision-making as a method is coherent with recovery orientation in mental health services and results in better-informed patients and fewer conflicts regarding decisions. A qualitative intervention study was designed to evaluate changes in attitudes and knowledge about mental health recovery in Sweden. Nine participants were interviewed, and the data were analysed by content analysis. Findings Three categories were generated from the analysis: Increased theoretical knowledge, changing attitudes about practical approaches and the significance of social factors in recovery. Originality/value When shared decision-making is to be implemented in mental health, professionals need to gain knowledge about recovery and need to adopt changed roles as health professionals. Educational interventions therefore seem necessary if such changes are to happen.
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
用户参与决策——对心理健康专业人员经验的定性干预研究
目的本研究的目的是描述心理健康专业人员在接受教育干预后,对心理健康康复使用者的态度、知识和临床实践决策参与的变化。设计/方法/方法精神卫生保健的使用者希望参与有关他们自己的精神卫生保健的决策。共同决策作为一种方法与精神卫生服务的康复导向相一致,并使患者更了解情况,减少决策方面的冲突。设计了一项定性干预研究,以评估瑞典对精神健康康复的态度和知识的变化。对9名参与者进行访谈,并对数据进行内容分析。结果:理论知识的增加,对实际方法的态度的改变,以及社会因素在康复中的重要性。原创性/价值当在精神卫生领域实施共同决策时,专业人员需要获得有关康复的知识,并需要改变作为卫生专业人员的角色。因此,如果要发生这种变化,教育干预似乎是必要的。
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
Journal of Public Mental Health
Journal of Public Mental Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
7.10%
发文量
32
期刊最新文献
Overcoming challenges of embedding child and youth mental health research in community NHS services Psychological wellbeing and avoidance strategies as moderators between excessive social media use and academic performance among Indian college students Pain and associated functional impairment in the Danish general population: the role of mental well-being Impact of nature on the mental health and well-being of the ICU survivors: an interpretative phenomenological analysis Public mental health and wellbeing interventions delivered by allied health professionals (AHPs): mapping the evidence and identification of gaps. A systematic review
×
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