Barriers and facilitators when implementing family involvement for persons with psychotic disorders in community mental health centres - a nested qualitative study

被引:17
作者
Hansson, Kristiane Myckland [1 ]
Romoren, Maria [1 ]
Pedersen, Reidar [1 ]
Weimand, Bente [2 ,3 ,4 ]
Hestmark, Lars [1 ]
Norheim, Irene [5 ]
Ruud, Torleif [2 ,6 ]
Hymer, Inger Stolan [7 ]
Heiervang, Kristin Sverdvik [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Oslo, Ctr Med Eth, Postbox 1130 Blindern, N-0318 Oslo, Norway
[2] Akershus Univ Hosp, Div Mental Hlth Serv, Sykehusveien 25, N-1474 Nordbyhagen, Norway
[3] Univ South Eastern Norway, Fac Hlth & Social Sci, Ctr Mental Hlth & Subst Abuse, Drammen, Norway
[4] OsloMet Oslo Metropolitan Univ, Fac Hlth Sci, Oslo, Norway
[5] Vestre Viken Hosp Trust, Div Mental Hlth & Addict, Drammen, Norway
[6] Univ Oslo, Inst Clin Med, Oslo, Norway
[7] Oslo Univ Hosp, Early Intervent Psychosis Advisory Unit South Eas, Div Mental Hlth & Addict, Oslo, Norway
关键词
Family involvement; Family interventions; Family psychoeducation; Psychotic disorders; Implementation; Barriers; Facilitators; Mental health services research; SHARING INFORMATION; SERVICE USERS; INTERVENTIONS; PEOPLE; CARE; SCHIZOPHRENIA; SCIENCE;
D O I
10.1186/s12913-022-08489-y
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background The uptake of family involvement in health care services for patients with psychotic disorders is poor, despite a clear evidence base, socio-economic and moral justifications, policy, and guideline recommendations. To respond to this knowledge-practice gap, we established the cluster randomised controlled trial: Implementation of guidelines on Family Involvement for persons with Psychotic disorders in community mental health centres (IFIP). Nested in the IFIP trial, this sub-study aims to explore what organisational and clinical barriers and facilitators local implementation teams and clinicians experience when implementing family involvement in mental health care for persons with psychotic disorders. Methods We performed 21 semi-structured focus groups, including 75 participants in total. Implementation team members were interviewed at the initial and middle phases of the intervention period, while clinicians who were not in the implementation team were interviewed in the late phase. A purposive sampling approach was used to recruit participants with various engagement in the implementation process. Data were analysed using manifest content analysis. Results Organisational barriers to involvement included: 1) Lack of shared knowledge, perceptions, and practice 2) Lack of routines 3) Lack of resources and logistics. Clinical barriers included: 4) Patient-related factors 5) Relative-related factors 6) Provider-related factors. Organisational facilitators for involvement included: 1) Whole-ward approach 2) Appointed and dedicated roles 3) Standardisation and routines. Clinical facilitators included: 4) External implementation support 5) Understanding, skills, and self-efficacy among mental health professionals 6) Awareness and attitudes among mental health professionals. Conclusions Implementing family involvement in health care services for persons with psychotic disorders is possible through a whole-ward and multi-level approach, ensured by organisational- and leadership commitment. Providing training in family psychoeducation to all staff, establishing routines to offer a basic level of family involvement to all patients, and ensuring that clinicians get experience with family involvement, reduce or dissolve core barriers. Having access to external implementation support appears decisive to initiate, promote and evaluate implementation. Our findings also point to future policy, practice and implementation developments to offer adequate treatment and support to all patients with severe mental illness and their families.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 56 条
[1]   The practice and politics of responsive evaluation [J].
Abma, TA .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EVALUATION, 2006, 27 (01) :31-43
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1994, Am J Psychiatry, V151, P1
[3]   Psychosocial and psychological interventions for relapse prevention in schizophrenia: a systematic review and network meta [J].
Bighelli, Irene ;
Rodolico, Alessandro ;
Garcia-Mieres, Helena ;
Pitschel-Walz, Gabi ;
Hansen, Wulf-Peter ;
Schneider-Thoma, Johannes ;
Siafis, Spyridon ;
Wu, Hui ;
Wang, Dongfang ;
Salanti, Georgia ;
Furukawa, Toshi A. ;
Barbui, Corrado ;
Leucht, Stefan .
LANCET PSYCHIATRY, 2021, 8 (11) :969-980
[4]  
Bond G R, 2000, Ment Health Serv Res, V2, P75, DOI 10.1023/A:1010153020697
[5]   Family Interventions in Psychosis: A Review of the Evidence and Barriers to Implementation [J].
Bucci, Sandra ;
Berry, Katherine ;
Barrowclough, Christine ;
Haddock, Gillian .
AUSTRALIAN PSYCHOLOGIST, 2016, 51 (01) :62-68
[6]   A qualitative analysis of relatives', health professionals' and service users' views on the involvement in care of relatives in Bipolar Disorder [J].
Chatzidamianos, Gerasimos ;
Lobban, Fiona ;
Jones, Steven .
BMC PSYCHIATRY, 2015, 15
[7]   A Fine Line to Walk: Case Managers' Perspectives on Sharing Information With Families [J].
Chen, Fang-pei .
QUALITATIVE HEALTH RESEARCH, 2008, 18 (11) :1556-1565
[8]   Preferences for Family Involvement in Care Among Consumers With Serious Mental Illness [J].
Cohen, Amy N. ;
Drapalski, Amy L. ;
Glynn, Shirley M. ;
Medoff, Deborah ;
Fang, Li Juan ;
Dixon, Lisa B. .
PSYCHIATRIC SERVICES, 2013, 64 (03) :257-263
[9]   Implementation of a Family Intervention for Individuals with Schizophrenia [J].
Cohen, Amy N. ;
Glynn, Shirley M. ;
Hamilton, Alison B. ;
Young, Alexander S. .
JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2010, 25 :32-37
[10]   Why involve families in acute mental healthcare? A collaborative conceptual review [J].
Dirik, Aysegul ;
Sandhu, Sima ;
Giacco, Domenico ;
Barrett, Katherine ;
Bennison, Gerry ;
Collinson, Sue ;
Priebe, Stefan .
BMJ OPEN, 2017, 7 (09)