决策指导干预对早期精神病青年的个案研究分析。

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Community Mental Health Journal Pub Date : 2025-01-03 DOI:10.1007/s10597-024-01425-w
Elizabeth C Thomas, Alicia Lucksted, Laura A Siminoff, Irene Hurford, Maria O'Connell, David L Penn, Irene Casey, Margaret Smith, John Suarez, Mark S Salzer
{"title":"决策指导干预对早期精神病青年的个案研究分析。","authors":"Elizabeth C Thomas, Alicia Lucksted, Laura A Siminoff, Irene Hurford, Maria O'Connell, David L Penn, Irene Casey, Margaret Smith, John Suarez, Mark S Salzer","doi":"10.1007/s10597-024-01425-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Young adults with early psychosis often disengage from essential early intervention services (i.e., Coordinated Specialty Care or CSC in the United States). While decision support interventions improve service engagement, their use in this population is underexplored. This study evaluated the feasibility, acceptability, fidelity, and potential impact of a decision coaching intervention for young adults with early psychosis in CSC services. Using a mixed-method, longitudinal, collective case study design, we assessed the intervention's impact on decision-making needs through the Decisional Conflict Scale and qualitative interviews. We also evaluated feasibility, fidelity, and acceptability through observations and feedback from interventionists and participants. Eight young adults from three CSC programs participated, showing variable engagement, with generally favorable fidelity and acceptability ratings. The Decisional Conflict Scale revealed mixed findings, while four themes from qualitative interviews emerged: Perspective and Information Seeking, Motivation and Prioritization, Empowerment and Confidence, and Critical Thinking and Evaluation. The findings suggest that training CSC providers-including peer specialists and clinicians-to deliver decision coaching with fidelity is feasible, well-received by young adults, and potentially impactful on decision-making. Replication in a larger controlled trial, addressing observed study limitations, is warranted. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT04532034) on August 28, 2020, as Temple University Protocol Record 261047, Facilitating Engagement in Evidence-Based Treatment for Early Psychosis (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04532034?term=NCT04532034&draw=2&rank=1).</p>","PeriodicalId":10654,"journal":{"name":"Community Mental Health Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Case Study Analysis of a Decision Coaching Intervention for Young Adults with Early Psychosis.\",\"authors\":\"Elizabeth C Thomas, Alicia Lucksted, Laura A Siminoff, Irene Hurford, Maria O'Connell, David L Penn, Irene Casey, Margaret Smith, John Suarez, Mark S Salzer\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10597-024-01425-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Young adults with early psychosis often disengage from essential early intervention services (i.e., Coordinated Specialty Care or CSC in the United States). While decision support interventions improve service engagement, their use in this population is underexplored. This study evaluated the feasibility, acceptability, fidelity, and potential impact of a decision coaching intervention for young adults with early psychosis in CSC services. Using a mixed-method, longitudinal, collective case study design, we assessed the intervention's impact on decision-making needs through the Decisional Conflict Scale and qualitative interviews. We also evaluated feasibility, fidelity, and acceptability through observations and feedback from interventionists and participants. Eight young adults from three CSC programs participated, showing variable engagement, with generally favorable fidelity and acceptability ratings. The Decisional Conflict Scale revealed mixed findings, while four themes from qualitative interviews emerged: Perspective and Information Seeking, Motivation and Prioritization, Empowerment and Confidence, and Critical Thinking and Evaluation. The findings suggest that training CSC providers-including peer specialists and clinicians-to deliver decision coaching with fidelity is feasible, well-received by young adults, and potentially impactful on decision-making. Replication in a larger controlled trial, addressing observed study limitations, is warranted. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT04532034) on August 28, 2020, as Temple University Protocol Record 261047, Facilitating Engagement in Evidence-Based Treatment for Early Psychosis (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04532034?term=NCT04532034&draw=2&rank=1).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10654,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Community Mental Health Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Community Mental Health Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10597-024-01425-w\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Community Mental Health Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10597-024-01425-w","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

患有早期精神病的年轻人经常脱离必要的早期干预服务(即美国的协调专科护理或CSC)。虽然决策支持干预措施提高了服务参与度,但它们在这一人群中的应用尚未得到充分探索。本研究评估了决策指导干预在CSC服务中对早期精神病年轻人的可行性、可接受性、保真度和潜在影响。采用混合方法、纵向、集体案例研究设计,我们通过决策冲突量表和定性访谈评估干预对决策需求的影响。我们还通过观察和干预者和参与者的反馈来评估可行性、保真度和可接受性。来自三个CSC项目的八名年轻人参与了研究,表现出不同程度的参与度,但总体上对忠诚度和可接受性都有好感。决策冲突量表显示了混合的结果,而定性访谈的四个主题出现了:观点和信息寻求,动机和优先级,授权和信心,批判性思维和评估。研究结果表明,培训CSC提供者(包括同行专家和临床医生)忠实地提供决策指导是可行的,受到年轻人的欢迎,并可能对决策产生影响。在更大的对照试验中重复,解决观察研究的局限性,是有保证的。该试验于2020年8月28日在ClinicalTrials.gov(标识符:NCT04532034)注册,编号为天普大学协议记录261047,促进参与早期精神病的循证治疗(https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04532034?term=NCT04532034&draw=2&rank=1)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Case Study Analysis of a Decision Coaching Intervention for Young Adults with Early Psychosis.

Young adults with early psychosis often disengage from essential early intervention services (i.e., Coordinated Specialty Care or CSC in the United States). While decision support interventions improve service engagement, their use in this population is underexplored. This study evaluated the feasibility, acceptability, fidelity, and potential impact of a decision coaching intervention for young adults with early psychosis in CSC services. Using a mixed-method, longitudinal, collective case study design, we assessed the intervention's impact on decision-making needs through the Decisional Conflict Scale and qualitative interviews. We also evaluated feasibility, fidelity, and acceptability through observations and feedback from interventionists and participants. Eight young adults from three CSC programs participated, showing variable engagement, with generally favorable fidelity and acceptability ratings. The Decisional Conflict Scale revealed mixed findings, while four themes from qualitative interviews emerged: Perspective and Information Seeking, Motivation and Prioritization, Empowerment and Confidence, and Critical Thinking and Evaluation. The findings suggest that training CSC providers-including peer specialists and clinicians-to deliver decision coaching with fidelity is feasible, well-received by young adults, and potentially impactful on decision-making. Replication in a larger controlled trial, addressing observed study limitations, is warranted. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT04532034) on August 28, 2020, as Temple University Protocol Record 261047, Facilitating Engagement in Evidence-Based Treatment for Early Psychosis (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04532034?term=NCT04532034&draw=2&rank=1).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
3.70%
发文量
133
期刊介绍: Community Mental Health Journal focuses on the needs of people experiencing serious forms of psychological distress, as well as the structures established to address those needs. Areas of particular interest include critical examination of current paradigms of diagnosis and treatment, socio-structural determinants of mental health, social hierarchies within the public mental health systems, and the intersection of public mental health programs and social/racial justice and health equity. While this is the journal of the American Association for Community Psychiatry, we welcome manuscripts reflecting research from a range of disciplines on recovery-oriented services, public health policy, clinical delivery systems, advocacy, and emerging and innovative practices.
期刊最新文献
Introduction to Special Issue on Recovery at 30: Emancipation, Cooptation, or the End of an Era? Autoethnographic Reflections on Mental Distress and Medication Management: Conceptualising Biomedical and Recovery Models of Mental Health. Antipsychotics and Identity: The Adverse Effect No One is Talking About. Promoting Reflection on the Process of Recovery: Unique Contributions from Literature and the Humanities for Practitioner. Neorecovery: A Critical Analysis of the Relationship between Neoliberalism and the Recovery Movement.
×
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