Organizational Change in Complex Systems: Organizational and Leadership Factors in the Introduction of Open Dialogue to Mental Health Care Services

Becoming an Open Dialogue practitioner: a qualitative study of practitioners' training experiences and transitioning to practice

Introduction

In the context of transforming mental healthcare towards more personalised and recovery-oriented models, Open Dialogue has attracted significant international interest. Open Dialogue proposes a way of organising services and delivering care that supports an immediate response to crisis, relational continuity of care, a social network approach and the empowerment of networks through shared decision-making and a flattened hierarchy. The ODDESSI trial currently being conducted in the UK is assessing the model's clinical and cost-effectiveness. Practitioners who delivered the approach within the trial undertook a one-year Open Dialogue foundation training programme, however little is known about their training experiences. This study aimed to explore practitioners' experiences of receiving the training and transitioning to dialogic practice.

Methods

Individual, joint and focus group interviews with 32 Open Dialogue practitioners were conducted. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the transcripts and transformational learning theory informed the interpretation of the findings.

Results

Two themes further divided in subthemes were generated from the data: (1) experiences and impact of formal training and (2) becoming an Open Dialogue practitioner as an ongoing learning process beyond formal training: barriers and facilitators.

Discussion

The one-year Open Dialogue foundation training was a transformative experience for participants due to its emphasis on self-work and its impact on a personal level. Practitioners felt adequately prepared by their training for dialogic practice, yet becoming an OD practitioner was seen as a continual process extending beyond formal training, necessitating ongoing engagement with the approach and organisational support. However, the commitment of participants to deliver optimal dialogic care was occasionally impeded by organisational constraints, resource limitations, and often having to concurrently deliver conventional care alongside Open Dialogue.

Feasibility of an Open Dialogue-Inspired Approach for Young Adults with Psychosis in a Public Hospital System

The objective was to determine the feasibility of an Open Dialogue-inspired approach in a metropolitan, public hospital setting with predominately African American participants. Participants were ages 18-35, experienced psychosis within the past month, and involved at least one support person in their care. We evaluated domains of feasibility including implementation, adaptation, practicality, acceptability, and limited-efficacy. An organizational change model (Addressing Problems Through Organizational Change) facilitated implementation. Clinicians received three trainings and ongoing supervision. Network meetings were successfully implemented with good self-reported fidelity to principles of dialogic practice. Some adaptations (less frequent meetings and no home visits) were necessary. A subset of individuals completed research assessments over 12 months. Qualitative interviews with participants suggested the intervention was acceptable. Symptom and functional outcomes were preliminary but trended toward improvement. Implementation was feasible with relatively brief training, organizational change processes, and context-specific adaptations. Lessons learned can assist in planning a larger research study.

Unraveling complexity in changing mental health care towards person-centered care

Background

Mental health care (MHC) needs to shift towards person-centered care to better meet people's individual needs. Open Dialogue (OD) is well-aligned with this perspective and brings it into practice. This study focuses on exploring the change process within a pilot project involving three MHC teams as they transition to a person-centered OD practice. Our aim is to identify and reflect on the challenges faced by MHC professionals in adopting person-centered care, and shedding light on the underlying complexity of these challenges. By gaining a better understanding of these obstacles, we hope to contribute to the adoption of the person-centered approach in MHC practice.

Methods

Our research employed a qualitative design, involving a total of 14 semi-structured interviews with MHC professionals who were either trained in OD, OD trainees, or MHC professionals without OD training. To analyze the data, we utilized a hybrid approach that combined deductive - and inductive thematic analysis.

Results

We identified four distinctive challenges: (1) understanding and knowledge transfer, (2) (inter)personal process, (3) emotional discomfort, and (4) the need for multi-stakeholder participation and support. In practice, these challenges intersect and the appearance of and relationships between these challenges are not linear or disentangleable.

Conclusion

Upon careful consideration of these interdependent challenges, it became evident that embedding a person-centered approach like OD brings about systemic change, leading to an unfamiliar situation X. The research findings indicated that understanding and conveying the concept of person-centered care in practical settings poses significant challenges. The field of knowledge management helps to capture the complexity of understanding and transferring this knowledge. The change process necessitates an (inter)personal process and elicits emotional discomfort, as person-centered OD practice confronts a deeply entrenched paradigm in MHC. Achieving a shared understanding of person-centered care requires dedicated time and attention, while introducing this approach prompts broader discussions on underlying values and human rights in MHC. Current implementation efforts may underestimate or overlook these underlying values, but initiating an open dialogue can serve as an initial step in addressing the complexities.

Anticipation dialogs in Vermont’s system of mental healthcare: Sustaining the growth of a dialogic practice culture

Open dialog is both a therapeutic approach and a way of organizing the system of mental healthcare that has been evolving in Finland since the 1980s. In Vermont, over the last decade, there has been an organic statewide effort to begin to integrate dialogic principles into the public system of mental healthcare. Because of the organic nature of these initiatives, there have not been coordinated systemic changes to support dialogic practices. To learn what visions participants in dialogically informed practice contexts have for the future as well as what structural innovations would support these visions anticipation dialogs were offered at three dialogically informed community mental health centers and one public psychiatric. The anticipation dialog was developed in Finland during the late 1980s to aid stuck professional and social networks in finding ways to move forward looking back from an imagined positive future. Twenty-seven multidisciplinary staff members and one service recipient participated in the dialogs. The authors conducted a multi-step process of thematic discourse analysis of all 4 anticipation dialogs. Findings underscore dilemmas entailed in growing a dialogic practice system, including the toll systemic uncertainty takes on workers in the system and the simultaneous pull to offer some amount of open-endedness to the system change process in the spirit of inclusiveness, mutual trust, democracy, and reducing hierarchy. Other key findings influencing sustainability of dialogic practices in community mental health include integrating dialogic work into roles rather than adding them to existing responsibilities. Our experiences indicate that anticipation dialogs may be a way of conducting systemic research that contributes to the forward momentum of system innovation. Offering a greater length of time for organizational anticipation dialogs would be valuable, as would centering the voices of clients and their networks.

Implementation of open dialogue in Germany: Efforts, challenges, and obstacles

Purpose

The Open Dialogue (OD) approach has been implemented in different countries worldwide. OD not only depends on therapeutic principles but also requires a distinct set of structural changes that may impede its full implementation. In Germany, OD is currently practiced in different mental health care settings across the country. Yet, full implementation of OD principles is limited due to the extreme structural and financial fragmentation of the German mental health care system. With this as a background, the aim of this study was to investigate the efforts, challenges and obstacles of OD implementation in Germany.

Methods

This article presents the German results from the international HOPEnDIALOGUE survey, supplemented with expert interview data. Thirty eight teams currently providing OD took part in the survey. Sixteen expert interviews were carried out with stakeholders from various care settings. Survey data were analyzed descriptively and the qualitative data were evaluated using a thematic analysis approach.

Results

While having to adapt to the fragmented German health care system, OD has been mainly implemented from outpatient service providers and stand-alone services. About half of the teams implemented OD under the conditions of cross-sectoral model contracts and, thus, are considerably limited when it comes to OD implementation. Altogether, OD is not implemented to its full extent in each of the institutions surveyed. Similarly, the expert interviews revealed various challenges that mainly relate to the realization of OD's structural principles, whereas the implementation of its therapeutic benefits remains less affected. However, these challenges have managed to lead to great commitment by single teams and a certain level of implementation of OD-related concepts.

Conclusion

OD in Germany can currently only be fully implemented under the cross-sectoral care model contract system that is often temporary, thus significantly hindering its continuous development. Any evaluation of OD's effectiveness in Germany thus needs to take into account the fragmented nature of the country's health care system and control for the multiple barriers that impede implementation. Reforms of the German health care system are also urgently needed to create more favorable conditions for the implementation of OD.

Open Dialogue as a cultural practice - critical perspectives on power obstacles when teaching and enabling this approach in current psychiatry

Building on both therapeutic and organizational principles, adopting Open Dialogue (OD) calls various routines of the current mental health system into question, resulting in potential obstacles with implementation. This perspective paper aims to reflect on power relations as potential disruptive factors in enabling the OD approach in mental health care. Drawing on data from a small implementation study, followed by reflections from three perspectives, we conclude with a discussion exploring the potential of understanding OD as a fundamental human practice to reduce these power-related obstacles.