Clinical decision making and outcome in the routine care of people with severe mental illness across Europe (CEDAR)

The journey of service users with complex mental health needs: a qualitative study

Background: This study aimed to provide a robust picture of the journey of service users with complex mental health needs by evaluating the perspectives of service users and carers with lived experience of services and gaining clinician views about decision making in relation to this cohort. Methods: A qualitative design was used. Service users (n = 11), carers (n = 10) and clinicians (n = 18) took part in semi-structured interviews, which were transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis. Results: The following themes were identified by participants: 'relationships with staff,' 'treatment options, pathways and availability,' 'the role of autonomy in recovery,' 'impact of out-of-area placements,' and 'specialist training for staff.' The findings demonstrated that the journey of serviceusers can be impacted by a wide range of factors, including relationships with staff, the nature of support offered, community response, financial constraints, and organisational goals around bed pressures. Conclusions: Recommendations include the need for staff to work in partnership with service users and carers, foster autonomy, access specialised suicide prevention training, and agree discharge and contingency plans with service users. Further work is needed to deliver the best possible experience for individuals with complex mental health needs and those who care for them.

How do decision making and fairness mediate the relationship between involuntary hospitalisation and perceived coercion among psychiatric inpatients?

BACKGROUND

Coercion perceived by psychiatric inpatients is not exclusively determined by formal measures such as involuntary admissions, seclusion or restraint, but is also associated with patients' characteristics and professionals' attitude.

AIMS

This study examined how inpatients' involvement in the decision making process, the respect of their decision making preference, and their feeling of having been treated fairly mediate the relationship between involuntary hospitalisation and perceived coercion both at admission and during hospital stay.

METHODS

Mediation analysis were performed in order to study the relationship between involuntary hospitalisation and perceived coercion among 230 patients, voluntarily and involuntarily admitted in six psychiatric hospitals.

RESULTS

32.2% of the participants were involuntarily hospitalised. Taken individually, stronger participants' involvement in decision making process, better respect for their decision making preference and higher level of perceived fairness partially mediated the relationship between involuntary hospitalisation and perceived coercion by reducing the level of the latter both at admission and during the hospitalisation. In multiple mediator models, only involvement and respect played an important role at admission. During the hospitalisation, perceived fairness was the most relevant mediator, followed by involvement in decision making.

CONCLUSIONS

During psychiatric hospitalisation patients' involvement in decision making, respect of their decision making preference and perceived fairness determined the relationship between involuntary hospitalisation and perceived coercion, but not in the same way at admission and during the stay. Involving patients in decision making and treating them fairly may be more relevant than taking account of their decision making preference in order to reduce perceived coercion.

Experiencing (Shared) Decision Making: Results from a Qualitative Study of People with Mental Illness and Their Family Members

(1) Background: There is a fundamental shift in healthcare toward shared decision making (SDM). This study explores SDM from the perspective of individuals affected by mental illness and their family members and investigates factors which promote and hinder the process. (2) Methods: We conducted N = 15 telephone interviews (n = 4 adults affected by mental illness, n = 5 family members, n = 6 both applicable, the majority reporting experiences with affective and anxiety disorders). Data were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed according to procedures established by Mayring. (3) Results: Individuals affected by mental illness and their family members have a strong desire to be involved in treatment decisions and to participate in finding a diagnosis. Often these stakeholders are denied the opportunity to participate; sometimes enabling behaviors impede participation. The stigmatization of mental illnesses is a major barrier. There are also structural barriers to SDM within the healthcare system. Peer support, self-help associations, and psychosocial counseling services are important to empowering individuals and promoting SDM. (4) Conclusions: SDM has the potential to improve the quality of mental healthcare. Barriers can be mitigated and new approaches for interventions in the psychiatric sector have been identified. This study has also shown the importance of understanding SDM as a process that should begin at the diagnostic phase.

Measures used to assess interventions for increasing patient involvement in Danish healthcare setting: a rapid review

OBJECTIVE

To identify measures used within Denmark evaluating any type of intervention designed to facilitate patient involvement in healthcare.

DESIGN

Environmental scan employing rapid review methods.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PsycInfo and CINAHL were searched from 6-9 April 2021 from database inception up to the date of the search.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Quantitative, observational and mixed methods studies with empirical data on outcomes used to assess any type of intervention aiming to increase patient involvement with their healthcare. Language limitations were Danish and English.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent reviewers extracted data from 10% of the included studies and, due to their agreement, the data from the rest were extracted by first author. Data were analysed with reference to existing categories of measuring person-centred care; findings were synthesised using narrative summaries. Adapted Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines were used to guide reporting.

RESULTS

Among 3767 records, 43 studies met the inclusion criteria, including 74 different measures used to evaluate interventions aimed at increasing patient involvement within healthcare in Danish hospital and community settings. Generic measures assessed: patient engagement (n=3); supporting self-management (n=8); supporting shared decision-making (n=9); patient satisfaction and experiences of care (n=11); health-related patient-reported outcome (n=20).

CONCLUSIONS

Across Denmark, complex interventions designed to improve patient involvement with healthcare vary in their goals and content. Some targeting healthcare professionals, some patient health literacy and some service infrastructure. A plethora of measures assess the impact of these interventions on patient, professional and service delivery outcomes. Few measures assessed patient involvement directly, and it is unclear which proxy measures capture indicators of perceived involvement. Lack of conceptual clarity between intervention goals, the components of change and measures makes it difficult to see what types of intervention can best support change in services to ensure patients are more effectively involved in their healthcare.

Impact of clinical decision-making participation and satisfaction on outcomes in mental health practice: results from the CEDAR European longitudinal study

The present study aimed to assess: (1) whether a more active involvement of patients is associated with an improvement of clinical symptoms, global functioning, and quality-of-life; and (2) how patients' satisfaction with clinical decisions can lead to better outcome after 1 year. Data were collected as part of the study 'Clinical decision-making and outcome in routine care for people with severe mental illness (CEDAR)', a longitudinal observational study, funded by the European Commission and carried out in six European countries. Patients' inclusion criteria were: (a) aged between 18 and 60 years; (b) diagnosis of a severe mental illness of any kind according to the Threshold Assessment Grid (TAG) ≥ 5 and duration of illness ≥ 2 years; (c) expected contact with the local mental health service during the 12-month observation period; (d) adequate skills in the language of the host countries; and (e) the ability to provide written informed consent. The clinical decision-making styles of clinicians and the patient satisfaction with decisions were assessed using the Clinical Decision Making Style and the Clinical Decision Making Involvement and Satisfaction scales, respectively. Patients were assessed at baseline and 1 year after the recruitment. The sample consisted of 588 patients with severe mental illness, mainly female, with a mean age of 41.69 (±10.74) and a mean duration of illness of 12.5 (±9.27) years. The majority of patients were diagnosed with psychotic (45.75%) or affective disorders (34.01%). At baseline, a shared CDM style was preferred by 70.6% of clinicians and about 40% of patients indicated a high level of satisfaction with the decision and 31% a medium level of satisfaction. Higher participation in clinical decisions was associated with improved social functioning and quality-of-life, and reduced interpersonal conflicts, sense of loneliness, feelings of inadequacy, and withdrawal in friendships after 1 year (p < 0.05). Moreover, a higher satisfaction with decisions was associated with a better quality-of-life (p < 0.0001), reduced symptom severity (p < 0.0001), and a significantly lower illness burden associated with symptoms of distress (p < 0.0001), interpersonal difficulties (p < 0.0001), and problems in social roles (p < 0.05). Our findings clearly show that a higher involvement in and satisfaction of patients with clinical decision-making was associated with better outcomes. More efforts have to be made to increase the involvement of patients in clinical decision-making in routine care settings.

Decision aids linked to the recommendations in clinical practice guidelines: results of the acceptability of a decision aid for patients with generalized anxiety disorder

Background

Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is one of the most prevalent mental health problems. Patients with GAD have unmet needs related to the information received about their disorder, its treatments and their participation in the decision-making process. The aim of this study is to develop and assess the acceptability of a patient decision aid (PtDA) for patients with GAD.

Method

The PtDA was developed following the International Patient Decision Aid Standards. The recommendations of the Spanish clinical practice guideline (CPG) for patients with GAD were used as the basis. The first prototype was developed by an expert committee, further improvements were made with patients (n = 2), clinical experts (n = 13) and the project management group (n = 7). The acceptability of this second draft was assessed by patients non-involved in the previous phases (n = 11).

Results

The final PtDA version included a brief description of GAD and its treatments. Most participants agreed that the PtDA was easy to use, visually appealing and useful. At least half of the participants learned new things about treatments and adverse effects.

Conclusions

A PtDA was developed for patients with GAD based on recommendations from the Spanish CPG. It was improved and accepted by patients and clinical experts involved. An evaluation of its effectiveness on the shared decision-making process during the clinical encounter is planned.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12911-022-01899-2.

Shared Decision Making in the Psychiatric Inpatient Setting: An Ethnographic Study about Interprofessional Psychiatric Consultations

Shared decision making is increasingly receiving attention in health care and might improve both the quality of care and patient outcomes. Nevertheless, due to its complexity, implementation of shared decision making in clinical practice seems challenging. This ethnographic study aimed to gain a better understanding of how psychiatric inpatients and the interprofessional care team interact during regular interprofessional psychiatric consultations. Data were collected through participant observation on two different psychiatric wards in a large psychiatric hospital in Switzerland. The observation focused on the contextual aspects of interprofessional patient consultations, the communication and interaction as well as the extent to which patients were involved in decision making. Participants included patients, psychiatrists, junior physicians, nurses, psychologists, social workers and therapists. We observed 71 interprofessional psychiatric consultations and they differed substantially in both wards in terms of context (place and form) and culture (way of interacting). On the contrary, results showed that the level of patient involvement in decision making was comparable and depended on individual factors, such as the health care professionals’ communication style as well as the patients’ personal initiative to be engaged. The main topics discussed with the patients related to pharmacotherapy and patient reported symptoms. Health care professionals in both wards used a rather unidirectional communication style. Therefore, in order to promote patient involvement in the psychiatric inpatient setting, rather than to focus on contextual factors, consultations should follow a specific agenda and promoting a bidirectional communication style for all parties involved is strongly recommended.

COMplex mental health PAThways (COMPAT) Study: A mixed methods study to inform an evidence-based service delivery model for people with complex needs: Study protocol

Background

Mental health services for adults, as they are currently configured, have been designed to provide predominantly community-based interventions. It has long been recognised that some patients have such significant clinical and/or risk needs that those needs cannot be adequately met within standard service delivery models, resulting in a pressing need to consider the best models for this group of people. This paper shares a protocol for a mixed methods study that aims to understand: the profile and history of service users described as having complex needs; the decision-making processes by clinicians that lead to complex needs categorisation; service users and carers experience of service use; and, associated economic impact. This protocol describes a comprehensive evaluation that aims to inform an evidence-based service delivery model for people with complex needs.

Methods

We will use a mixed methods design, combining quantitative and qualitative methods using in-depth descriptive and inferential analysis of patient records, written medical notes and in-depth interviews with service users, carers, and clinicians. The study will include five components: (1) a quantitative description and analysis of the demographic clinical characteristics of the patient group; (2) an economic evaluation of alternative patient pathways; (3) semi-structured interviews about service user and carer experiences; (4) using data from components 1–3 to co-produce vignettes jointly with relevant stakeholders involved in the care of service users with complex mental health needs; and, (5) semi-structured interviews about clinical decision-making by clinicians in relation to this patient group, using the vignettes as example case studies.

Discussion

The study’s key outcomes will be to: examine the resource use and cost-impact associated with alternative care pathways to the NHS and other sectors of the economy (including social care); explore patient health and non-health outcomes associated with alternative care pathways; and, gain an understanding of a complex service user group and how treatment decisions are made to inform consistent and person-centred future service delivery.

Proportionate translation of study materials and measures in a multinational global health trial: methodology development and implementation

OBJECTIVES

Current translation guidelines do not include sufficiently flexible translation approaches for different study materials. We aimed to develop a proportionate methodology to inform translation of all types of study materials in global health trials.

DESIGN

The design included three stages: (1) categorisation of study materials, (2) integration of existing translation frameworks and (3) methodology implementation (Germany, India, Israel, Tanzania and Uganda) and refinement.

PARTICIPANTS

The study population comprised 27 mental health service users and 27 mental health workers who were fluent in the local language in stage 7 (pretesting), and 54 bilingual mental health service users, aged 18 years or over, and able to give consent as judged by a clinician for step 9 (psychometric evaluation).

SETTING

The study took place in preparation for the Using Peer Support in Developing Empowering Mental Health Services (UPSIDES) randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN26008944).

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

The primary outcome measure was the Social Inclusion Scale (SIS).

RESULTS

The typology identifies four categories of study materials: local text, study-generated text, secondary measures and primary measure. The UPSIDES Proportionate Translation Methodology comprises ten steps: preparation, forward translation, reconciliation, back translation, review, harmonisation, pretesting, finalisation, psychometric evaluation and dissemination. The translated primary outcome measure for the UPSIDES Trial (SIS) demonstrated adequate content validity (49.3 vs 48.5, p=0.08), convergent validity and internal consistency (0.73), with minimal floor/ceiling effects.

CONCLUSION

This methodology can be recommended for translating, cross-culturally adapting and validating all study materials, including standardised measures, in future multisite global trials. The methodology is particularly applicable to multi-national studies involving sites with differing resource levels. The robustness of the psychometric findings is limited by the sample sizes for each site. However, making this limitation explicit is preferable to the typical practice of not reporting adequate details about measure translation and validation.

TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN26008944.

Supporting Mental Health Recovery, Citizenship, and Social Justice

Individuals with serious mental illness (SMI) have historically experienced stigma and marginalization. Mental health providers are well positioned to engage in social justice agendas geared at supporting the civil rights of those with SMI, and ultimately helping open doors to the full rights of participation in the community. By engaging and partnering in a mental health recovery and strengths-based orientation, leaders in these settings have the capacity to influence micro-, meso, and macro-systems. This can shed light on mechanisms to build on the strengths, capabilities, and hopes of individuals to live lives of meaning as they so define, with equal access to resources and rights, within communities of their choice. The article articulates an integrated application of these concepts for embracing and utilizing the concepts of mental health recovery, citizenship, and social justice in public mental health. Additionally, specific examples and practical applications are offered within the context of an inpatient setting and a community setting.

Clinical decision-making style preferences of European psychiatrists: Results from the Ambassadors survey in 38 countries

Background

While shared clinical decision-making (SDM) is the preferred approach to decision-making in mental health care, its implementation in everyday clinical practice is still insufficient. The European Psychiatric Association undertook a study aiming to gather data on the clinical decision-making style preferences of psychiatrists working in Europe.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional online survey involving a sample of 751 psychiatrists and psychiatry specialist trainees from 38 European countries in 2021, using the Clinical Decision-Making Style – Staff questionnaire and a set of questions regarding clinicians’ expertise, training, and practice.

Results

SDM was the preferred decision-making style across all European regions ([central and eastern Europe, CEE], northern and western Europe [NWE], and southern Europe [SE]), with an average of 73% of clinical decisions being rated as SDM. However, we found significant differences in non-SDM decision-making styles: participants working in NWE countries more often prefer shared and active decision-making styles rather than passive styles when compared to other European regions, especially to the CEE. Additionally, psychiatry specialist trainees (compared to psychiatrists), those working mainly with outpatients (compared to those working mainly with inpatients) and those working in community mental health services/public services (compared to mixed and private settings) have a significantly lower preference for passive decision-making style.

Conclusions

The preferences for SDM styles among European psychiatrists are generally similar. However, the identified differences in the preferences for non-SDM styles across the regions call for more dialogue and educational efforts to harmonize practice across Europe.

Conceptual understanding and applicability of shared decision-making in psychiatric care: An integrative review

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Shared decision-making is a concept originating in the medical field, and it is ideally based on a trustful relationship between the patient and the health professionals involved. Shared decision-making shows potential to strengthen patient autonomy and encourages patients to become involved in decisions regarding their treatment. WHAT DOES THE PAPER ADD TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: A universal concept and understanding of shared decision-making with relevance specifically to psychiatric clinical practice could not be identified in the analysed literature. Shared decision-making refers to a process, and how and whether the patient wishes to participate in the decision-making process should be clarified from the very beginning. On the basis of this synthesizing review, a process model for psychiatric practice was specified and illustrated to help lead health professionals, patients and other supporters through the decision-making process. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: The process of shared decision-making should be made visible to all persons involved, and it should be stated at the beginning that a decision must be made. Decisions regarding treatment are usually not limited to a single consultation. A collaborative approach including multiple health professionals and other supporters, such as peer workers and family members, is required. Psychiatric nurses could support patients during the process of decision-making and provide additional information, if requested.

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Patient involvement in decisions regarding treatment has increasingly been supported in health care, and therefore, shared decision-making (SDM), as an informative and participative approach, is promoted in the scientific literature.

AIM

To review the current state of research regarding the conceptual understanding and implementation of SDM in psychiatric clinical practice.

METHOD

An integrative review that included empirical, theoretical and conceptual research published between 1997 and 2019 was conducted. For this, five health-related databases were searched.

RESULTS

Fourteen articles were included in the synthesis. No universal conceptual understanding of SDM regarding psychiatric care could be identified, although several articles highlighted the link with other concepts, such as autonomy and patient-centeredness. Furthermore, four additional key themes with relevance for the successful implementation of SDM in clinical practice were determined.

DISCUSSION

SDM refers to a process and is usually not limited to a single consultation. SDM shows the potential to enhance patient-centred and recovery-oriented care. A collaborative approach including multiple health professionals, peer workers and family members is required.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The process of SDM should be made visible for all parties involved. Nurses in particular could play a key role by collecting information regarding patient's preferences and by providing support.

Shared Decision-Making and Information Needs among People with Generalized Anxiety Disorder

Shared decision making (SDM) aims to involve patients in the decisions about their care, considering their preferences, values and concerns about the different treatment options. However, research shows that people with mental health problems have considerable unmet information needs about their condition. This community-based cross-sectional study explores the SDM process and information needs among people with Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD), as an initial step in the design and development of a Patient Decision Aid for this population. Seventy participants completed an online survey with the Control Preference Scale, and questions about the perceived difficulty of past treatment decisions and the use of the Internet for searching for GAD-related information. Most participants preferred an active (42.9%) or collaborative role (41.4%) in the SDM process, and 53% did not perceive their preferred role. Information provided by healthcare professionals was considered insufficient by 28% of the sample, and over 30% reported using the Internet to look for GAD-related information at least once a week or more. The most relevant GAD-related information needs were general information (71.4%), information on self-help groups (65.7%), recommendations on how to face this disorder (61.4%) and information on treatment options (50%). Exploratory analyses showed that patients who perceived an active participation were more likely to search for information frequently (p = 0.038), and those who felt more involved than desired tended to search for more themes (p = 0.049). In summary, the study showed that a considerable percentage of GAD patients have unmet needs related to decision-making participation and information.

Contact with mental health services in the 12-month period before offending in a cohort of forensic order patients

There has been limited research examining the details of mental health service contact in the pre-offending period. A retrospective case-note study of the complete cohort of people found not criminally responsible or permanently unfit for trial in Queensland, Australia, was conducted. An electronic clinical database search for seven treatment event types in the 12-months pre-offence was conducted. Of the 123 eligible patients, half were recorded as having experienced at least one treatment event. There was a statistically significant increase in the number of patients experiencing a treatment-related event per month over this 12-month pre-offence period (increase of ∼1.4 patients per month, p < .001). The findings highlight the need for appropriate weight to be placed on both longitudinal and recent factors when undertaking routine clinical review or mental health assessment, or considering changes to a patient's diagnosis and treatment plan. Screening in custody and early intervention are also indicated to ensure appropriate treatment.

The clinical characterization of the patient with primary psychosis aimed at personalization of management

The current management of patients with primary psychosis worldwide is often remarkably stereotyped. In almost all cases an antipsychotic medica-tion is prescribed, with second-generation antipsychotics usually preferred to first-generation ones. Cognitive behavioral therapy is rarely used in the vast majority of countries, although there is evidence to support its efficacy. Psychosocial interventions are often provided, especially in chronic cases, but those applied are frequently not validated by research. Evidence-based family interventions and supported employment programs are seldom implemented in ordinary practice. Although the notion that patients with primary psychosis are at increased risk for cardiovascular diseases and diabetes mellitus is widely shared, it is not frequent that appropriate measures be implemented to address this problem. The view that the management of the patient with primary psychosis should be personalized is endorsed by the vast majority of clinicians, but this personalization is lacking or inadequate in most clinical contexts. Although many mental health services would declare themselves "recovery-oriented", it is not common that a focus on empowerment, identity, meaning and resilience is ensured in ordinary practice. The present paper aims to address this situation. It describes systematically the salient domains that should be considered in the characterization of the individual patient with primary psychosis aimed at personalization of management. These include positive and negative symptom dimensions, other psychopathological components, onset and course, neurocognition and social cognition, neurodevelopmental indicators; social functioning, quality of life and unmet needs; clinical staging, antecedent and concomitant psychiatric conditions, physical comorbidities, family history, history of obstetric complications, early and recent environmental exposures, protective factors and resilience, and internalized stigma. For each domain, simple assessment instruments are identified that could be considered for use in clinical practice and included in standardized decision tools. A management of primary psychosis is encouraged which takes into account all the available treatment modalities whose efficacy is supported by research evidence, selects and modulates them in the individual patient on the basis of the clinical characterization, addresses the patient's needs in terms of employment, housing, self-care, social relationships and education, and offers a focus on identity, meaning and resilience.

Multiperspective and Multimethod Evaluation of Flexible and Integrative Psychiatric Care Models in Germany: Study Protocol of a Prospective, Controlled Multicenter Observational Study (PsychCare)

Background: New cross-sectoral mental health care models have been initiated in Germany to overcome the fragmentation of the German health care system. Starting in 2013, flexible and integrative psychiatric care model projects according to §64b SGB V German Social Law (FIT64b) have been implemented. The study "PsychCare" combines quantitative and qualitative primary data with routine health insurance data for the evaluation of these models. Effects, costs and cost-effectiveness from the perspectives of patients, relatives and care providers are compared with standard care. Additionally, quality indicators for a modern, flexible and integrated care are developed. This article describes the rationale, design and methods of the project. Methods: "PsychCare" is built on a multiperspective and multimethod design. A controlled prospective multicenter cohort study is conducted with three data collection points (baseline assessment, follow-up after 9 and 15 months). A total of 18 hospitals (10 FIT64b model and 8 matched control hospitals) have consecutively recruited in- and outpatients with pre-specified common and/or severe psychiatric disorders. Primary endpoints are differences in change of health-related quality of life and treatment satisfaction. Sociodemographic and service receipt data of the primary data collection are linked with routine health insurance data. A cost-effectiveness analysis, a mixed method, participatory process evaluation by means of qualitative surveys and the development of quality indicators are further elements of "PsychCare." Discussion and Practical Implications: The results based on data from different methodological approaches will provide essential conclusions for the improvement of hospital based mental health care in Germany. This should result in the identification of key FIT64b elements that can be efficiently implemented into standard care in Germany and re-structure the care strongly aligned to patient needs. Clinical Trial Registration: German Clinical Trial Register, identifier DRKS 00022535.

Use of Acute Psychiatric Hospitalisation: A Study of the Factors Influencing Decisions to Arrange Acute Admission to Inpatient Mental Health Facilities

Background: Human decision-making involves a complex interplay of intra- and inter-personal factors. The decisions clinicians make in practise are subject to a wide range of influences. Admission to a psychiatric hospital is a major clinical intervention, but the decision-making processes involved in admissions remain unclear. Aims: To delineate the range of factors influencing clinicians' decisions to arrange acute psychiatric admissions. Methods: We undertook six focus groups with teams centrally involved in decisions to admit patients to hospital (crisis resolution home treatment, liaison psychiatry, approved mental health practitioners and consultant psychiatrists). The data were analysed using qualitative thematic analysis. Results: Our analysis of the data show a complex range of factors influencing decision-making that were categorised as those related to: (i) clinical and risk factors; (ii) fear/threat factors; (iii) interpersonal dynamics; (iv) contextual factors. Conclusions: Decisions to arrange acute admission to hospital are not just based on an appraisal of clinical and risk-related information. Emotional, interpersonal and contextual factors are also critical in decision-making. Delineating the breadth of factors that bear on clinical decision-making can inform approaches to (i) clinical decision-making research, (ii) the training and supervision of clinicians, and (iii) service delivery models.

When does shared decision making is adopted in psychiatric clinical practice? Results from a European multicentric study

To identify factors associated with the use of shared decision making in routine mental health care in a large multicenter European study. Data have been collected within the study "Clinical decision making and outcome in routine care for people with severe mental illness" (CEDAR), which is a naturalistic, longitudinal, observational study carried out in six European countries. Patients with a severe mental illness attending outpatient units and their treating clinicians have been recruited. Clinicians' Clinical Decision Making (CDM) styles have been explored through the Clinical Decision Making Style Scale. Patients' clinical and social outcomes have been assessed through validated assessment instruments. The sample consisted of 588 patients and 213 professionals. Professionals were mainly psychiatrists (35.7%), nurses (21.6%), support workers, social workers or occupational therapists (24.9%), psychologists (9.9%) or trainees in psychiatry (4.7%). In the majority of cases, clinicians adopted a shared CDM style. Shared CDM was more frequently adopted with patients with psychotic disorders, with a better quality of life and social functioning. At multivariate analyses, the likelihood of adopting shared decision making increased in patients with higher levels of interpersonal relationships' skills (p < 0.05) and global functioning (p < 0.01). On the contrary, being a trainee in psychiatry reduced the likelihood of adopting shared CDM (p < 0.008). Shared decision making has been adopted mainly when patients have a better functioning and less severe clinical symptomatology and by less trained clinicians, differently from national and international recommendations. More efforts should be made to implement interventions to promote shared CDM, with a specific focus for trainees in psychiatry.

Perceptions of shared decision-making in severe mental illness: An integrative review

WHAT IS KNOWN ABOUT SHARED DECISION-MAKING?: There is increasing evidence of the positive impact of shared decision-making on health outcomes. There has been little exploration of shared decision-making regarding people diagnosed with serious mental illness from the perspectives of key stakeholders including consumers, families and mental health professionals. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: Consumers show variability in the preference for their involvement. Most stakeholders acknowledge the importance of family involvement. MHPs should share the responsibility and right to facilitate consumer involvement. There is bidirectional association between shared decision-making and therapeutic relationships. The practice of shared decision-making is related to multiple factors, and one main perceived barrier is time. The majority of studies are from Western countries. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: Elicit consumer preferences and establish a collaborative therapeutic relationship. Encourage and engage families in treatment decision-making. Inter-professional collaboration should be integrated into shared decision-making. It might require lengthier consultation time. Studies in non-Western countries are needed to fully understand the impact of culture on shared decision-making. Abstract Introduction Shared decision-making (SDM) has been broadly advocated in health services and constitutes an important component of patient-centred care and relationship-based care. Aim To review available literature related to perceptions of key stakeholders about shared decision-making in serious mental illness. Method An integrative review was conducted through a search of four online databases from January 2012 to June 2019. Results Forty-six articles were included. Six themes were generated from the data analysis: (a) dynamic preferences for SDM, (b) various stakeholders are rarely involved, (c) SDM is not routinely implemented, (d) multiple facilitators and barriers to SDM, (e) SDM and therapeutic relationships interact, (f) SDM has a promising impact on health outcomes. Discussion Overall, most stakeholders have recognized the importance and flexibility of SDM in serious mental illness, although it is not routine in mental health service. Consumer preferences show variability in their involvement. Most stakeholders acknowledged the importance of family involvement to treatment decision-making. There are several significant challenges to practice SDM. It may require extended consultation times and increasing empirical evidence regarding the SDM outcomes, as well as integrating inter-professional collaboration into SDM. Most studies were conducted in Western culture. Implications for practice Mental health nurses should elicit consumer preferences and establish a collaborative therapeutic relationship. Encourage and engage families in treatment decision-making when consumers prefer their families to be involved. Inter-professional collaboration should be integrated into shared decision-making. The practice of shared decision-making might need extended consultation time and more robust evidence about the outcome of shared decision-making. Studies in non-Western cultures are needed to fully understand cultural issues of shared decision-making.

Implementation of the patient version of the evidence-based (S3) guideline for psychosocial interventions for patients with severe mental illness (IMPPETUS): study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The German guideline on psychosocial interventions for people with severe mental disorders recommends a broad spectrum of evidence-based treatments. Structured implementation of the associated patient version of the guideline is missing to date. The study aims to assess whether structured implementation of a patient guideline improves the empowerment of patients with severe mental disorders, as well as knowledge, attitudes and experiences regarding psychosocial interventions, service use, treatment satisfaction, treatment needs, quality of life and burden of care.

METHODS

The study is a multicentre, cluster-randomised, controlled study with two parallel groups. Inpatients and day hospital patients (all sexes; 18-65 years) with severe mental disorders will be included. Additionally, relatives of patients with mental disorders (all sexes; ≥ 18 years) will be included. In the experimental group, the patient guideline will be implemented using a multimodal strategy. Participants in the control group will receive treatment as usual but will be made aware of the patient guideline. The primary outcome is the change of empowerment, assessed by using the 'empowerment in the process of psychiatric treatment of patients with affective and schizophrenia disorders' (EPAS) scale. In addition, knowledge, attitudes and experiences regarding psychosocial interventions will be assessed as secondary outcomes, as well as service use, satisfaction with care, patient need and quality of life and participation and social inclusion. For relatives, the perceived burden of care also will be recorded. Results will be analysed using hierarchical linear models. For the health economic evaluation, the incremental cost-utility ratios will be computed using the differences in total costs of illness and the differences in quality-adjusted life years (QALY) between study groups.

DISCUSSION

The study will be the first to assess the effects of a structured implementation of the patient version of a psychiatric treatment guideline. The study has some limitations regarding the transferability of the results to other patients and other regions. Furthermore, problems with the recruitment of patients and relatives and with the implementation of intervention could occur during the study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study is registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) under registration number DRKS00017577 (Date of registration: 23 October 2019.

Patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) and provider assessment in mental health: a systematic review of the context of implementation

Purpose

To review and integrate the vast amount of literature yielded by recent growing interest in patient-reported outcome measurement and routine outcome measures (PROMs/ROMs), in order to suggest options and improvements for implementation. PROMs are the systematic assessment of service users’ health using standardized self-report measures. Specifically, for ROMs, it includes routine provider or caretaker assessment measures. Both are administered to ascertain routinely, the impact of treatment in mental health settings and to improve care. A review is needed because of the large differences in setting, conceptualization, practice and implementation. Here, we examine the different major projects worldwide.

Data sources

Psych INFO and PubMed including Medline, Biomed Central, EMBASE Psychiatry and Elsevier Science’s Direct.

Study selection

We conducted a systematized review of the literature published from 2000 to 2018 on the implementation and sustainability of PROMs and ROMs in mental health services for adults.

Data extraction, synthesis and Results

We described and characterized the programs in different countries worldwide. We identified 103 articles that met the inclusion criteria, representing over 80 PROMs/ROMs initiatives in 15 countries. National policy and structure of mental health services were found to be major factors in implementation. We discuss the great variability in PROMs/ROMs models in different countries, making suggestions for their streamlining and improvement.

Conclusion

We extracted valuable information on the different characteristics of the numerous PROMs/ROMs initiatives worldwide. However, in the absence of a strong nationwide policy effort and support, implementation seems scattered and irregular. Thus, development of the implementation of PROMs/ROMs is left to groups of enthusiastic clinicians and researchers, making sustainability problematic.

The Momentum trial: the efficacy of using a smartphone application to promote patient activation and support shared decision making in people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia in outpatient treatment settings: a randomized controlled single-blind trial

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) is often defined as an interactive process that ensures that both patient and practitioner are actively involved in the treatment and that they share all relevant information to arrive at a mental health decision. Previous SDM interventions have found improvements in outcomes such as personal recovery, higher perceived involvement in treatment decisions and knowledge about one's disease. Still, SDM occurs less frequently in mental health care than in primary care. Electronic aids developed to support patient activation and SDM could be a promising mean to engage patients in their mental healthcare. The aim of this trial is to investigate the effects of using a smartphone app to promote patient activation and support SDM for people with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders in an outpatient treatment setting.

METHODS

This randomised controlled trial will allocate participants to one of two groups: (1) Intervention group: smartphone app and TAU (treatment as usual) or (2) Control group: TAU without the smartphone app. A total sample size of 260 people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, schizotypal or delusional disorder will be recruited from five OPUS teams (a specialized early intervention program) in Denmark between 2019 and 2020. The intervention will last for 6 months with data collection at baseline, and at 3 and 6 months. Primary outcome will be self-perceived patient activation. Secondary outcomes will be feeling of being prepared for SDM; self-efficacy; working alliance; treatment satisfaction; positive and negative symptoms; level of functioning; hope; and perceived efficacy in patient-provider interaction. Patients' and health providers' preferences in clinical decision making will be assessed. Patients' usage and perceived usefulness of the app will be explored.

DISCUSSION

This study will investigate the efficacy of using the smartphone app to support people with severe mental illness in engaging in their own healthcare management. The study may provide evidence to the idea that linking client and practitioner in digital solutions can have advantages in facilitating SDM in mental health. The trial will provide new knowledge of whether a digital healthcare solution can improve patient activation and support SDM for people with severe mental illness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT03554655 Registered on: June 13, 2018.

Expectations vs reality: The expectations and experiences of psychiatric treatment reported by young adults at a mood and anxiety outpatient mental health program

AIM

To compare young adults' expectations of psychiatric treatment to their actual experiences and identify myths and assumptions that youth might hold prior to receiving care.

METHODS

We interviewed youth who engaged in at least 4 months of treatment at the First Episode Mood and Anxiety Program to theme saturation (N = 20). They were asked about their experience of treatment and the expectations they had prior to care. Transcribed interviews were analysed for themes.

RESULTS

Results indicated that participants often expected a cold, serious atmosphere, a "quick fix," and a directive therapeutic relationship. Although most patients had a negative experience at some point in their care, they overall described a welcoming environment with engaged providers and a collaborative therapeutic relationship. Participants found treatment more complex than they had anticipated, but ultimately experienced strengthening of agency and a change in perspective.

CONCLUSIONS

These results identify a need to recognize assumptions held by young adults seeking treatment for mental health symptoms. Addressing these preconceptions might reduce apprehension and improve readiness for treatment. This research provides direction on how to dispel myths and better prepare youth for the work involved in effective psychiatric care.

Perceived Coercion Among Patients Admitted in Psychiatric Wards: Italian Results of the EUNOMIA Study

The decision to use coercive measures (restraint, seclusion and forced medication) in psychiatric practice is controversial in mental health care. The EUNOMIA study was funded by the European Commission and carried out in 11 countries in order to develop European recommendations for good clinical practice on the use of coercive measures. The aim of the study is to identify sociodemographic and clinical predictors of the levels of perceived coercion in a sample of Italian patients with severe mental disorders at hospital admission. A total of 294 patients were recruited in five Italian psychiatric hospitals and screened with the MacArthur Perceived Coercion Scale to explore the levels of perceived coercion. Patients were assessed three times: within the first seven days after admission as well as after 1 and 3 months. At each time point, data on changes of perceived coercion, assessed by the Cantril Ladder of Perceived Coercion Scale, information on coercive measures received during hospitalization and the levels of satisfaction with the received treatments were collected. According to the multivariable regression model, being compulsorily admitted (OR: 2.5; 95% CI: 1.3-3.3, p < .000), being male (OR: 0.7; 95% CI: 0.9-1.4; p < .01), being older (OR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01-0.06) and less satisfied with received treatments (OR: -0.2; 95% CI: -0.3 to -0.1; p < .05) are all associated with higher levels of perceived coercion, even after controlling for the use of any coercive measure during hospitalization. Satisfaction with received treatment predicts the levels of perceived coercion and this should represent an important challenge for mental health professionals.

Severe Mental Illness in Community Mental Health Care in Spain: Prevalence and Related Factors

The aims of this study were to determine the prevalence of severe mental illness (SMI) in patients in contact with mental health services and to determine the factors associated with SMI. A total of 260 patients who met diagnostic criteria for SMI were assessed using the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scale and Health of the Nation Outcome Scales. The overall prevalence of SMI was 6.08 per thousand. According to the three different cutoff points with GAF, the prevalence of SMI ranged from 5.38 per thousand under the weak criterion (GAF < 70) to 1.01 per thousand under the strict criterion (GAF < 50). In the regression model, the dependent variable (presence of SMI) was defined using a GAF < 60, and the variables independently associated with the dependent variable were years of disease duration since diagnose, mental health service use, alcohol or other substance abuse, and depressive anxiety and other psychological symptoms.

Patients with schizophrenia assessing psychiatrists' communication skills

Communication plays a central role in mental health care. Yet, studies fail to address the adequacy of psychiatrists' communication according to patients' needs. We examined how patients with schizophrenia assess their psychiatrists' communication skills, inspecting the importance that these aspects have for patients. Thirty patients with schizophrenia filled the Communication Assessment Tool after the appointment with their psychiatrists. An external observer also rated the videotaped appointments using the same instrument. Patients' mean rating of their psychiatrists' communication was 4.28 (mean proportion of excellent, "5" scores, was 57.4%). "Treated me with respect" received the highest mean, whereas "Encouraged me to ask questions" received the lowest. The assessment by the external observer was concordant, though lower (mean = 3.39) than patients'. Psychiatrists' communication skills correlated positively with the importance that patients gave to the respective communication aspects (overall mean importance = 2.77). Main discrepancies were related with "Understood my concerns" and "Involved me in decisions". Patients who were non-married, with higher education level and in medical treatment for less time gave significantly higher scores to psychiatrists' communication. Patients with schizophrenia consider clinical communication important and their psychiatrists' communication adequate. Room for improvement exists, namely regarding more elicitation of patients' health concerns and involvement in the encounter.

Involvement of people with schizophrenia in decision-making in rural Ethiopia: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

The involvement of people with psychosocial disabilities in decision-making is a fundamental component of a person-centred and recovery-oriented model of care, but there has been little investigation of this approach in low- and middle-income countries. The aim of this study was to explore the involvement of people with schizophrenia in decision-making relating to their care in rural Ethiopia.

METHODS

A qualitative study was conducted in rural Ethiopia as part of the Rehabilitation Intervention for people with Schizophrenia in Ethiopia (RISE) project, involving two focus group discussions (n = 10) with community-based rehabilitation workers, and 18 in-depth interviews with people with schizophrenia, caregivers, health officers, supervisors and a community-based rehabilitation worker. Thematic analysis was used to examine major themes related to involvement in decision-making in this specific setting.

RESULTS

Involvement of people with schizophrenia in decision-making in this rural Ethiopian setting was limited and coercive practices were evident. People with schizophrenia tended to be consulted about their care only when they were considered clinically 'recovered'. Caregivers typically had a prominent role in decision-making, but they also acquiesced to the views of health care professionals. People with schizophrenia and caregivers were often unable to execute their desired choice due to inaccessible and unaffordable treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Community-based rehabilitation, as a model of care, may give opportunities for involvement of people with schizophrenia in decision-making. In order to increase involvement of people with schizophrenia in rural Ethiopia there needs to be greater empowerment of service users, wider availability of treatment choices and a facilitating policy environment. Further studies are needed to explore concepts of person-centred care and recovery across cultural settings.

Development and pilot of a decision-aid for patients with bipolar II disorder and their families making decisions about treatment options to prevent relapse

Introduction

Treatment decisions in bipolar II disorder (BPII) are finely-balanced and sensitive to patient preferences. This pilot study evaluated a decision-aid booklet (DA) for patients with BPII (and their family) to obtain evidence on its acceptability, feasibility, safety, and usefulness in potential end-users.

Methods

The DA booklet was developed according to International Patient Decision-Aid Standards. Thirty-one patients diagnosed with BPII and their families (n = 11), who were currently making or had previously made treatment decisions, participated. Participants read the DA and completed validated and purpose-designed questionnaires. A follow-up semi-structured telephone interview elicited more in-depth DA feedback (n = 40).

Results

Patients and family endorsed the DA booklet as: easy-to-use (100% agree), useful in treatment decision-making (100%), presenting balanced (patients = 96.8%, family = 100%), up-to-date (93.5%, 100%) and trustworthy information (93.5%, 100%) that did not provoke anxiety (93.5%, 90.9%). All participants stated that they would recommend the DA to others. Following DA use, all except one participant (97.6%) demonstrated adequate treatment knowledge (> 50% score). Patients reported low decisional conflict (M = 18.90/100) following DA use and felt well-prepared to make treatment decisions (M = 4.28/5). Most patients (90.3%) indicated uptake of treatments consistent with the best available clinical evidence. Additionally, a large proportion of patients made an informed choice about medication (65.5%) with adjunctive psychological treatment (50.0%), based on adequate knowledge and their treatment values. Interview findings further supported the DA’s acceptability among participants.

Discussion

Pilot findings indicate that patients with BPII and their family consider this DA booklet highly acceptable and useful in making evidence-based treatment decisions that align with their treatment preferences.

[Process analysis of weekly self- and external assessments of adolescents with substance abuse disorder during long-term psychotherapy]

Process analysis of weekly self- and external assessments of adolescents with substance abuse disorder during long-term psychotherapy Abstract.

OBJECTIVE

Little is known about the course of emotional and motivational states in young patients with substance use disorder (SUD) during long-term treatment.

METHOD

We collected weekly self-reports from N = 42 adolescents, resulting in 853 questionnaires. Additionally, 708 observations were obtained from their key carers. Principal component analysis (PCA) was used to explore the dimensional structure of the questionnaires. Multi-level models were applied to test for group differences and time series models to evaluate dependencies on the person level.

RESULTS

PCA yielded four factors: negative mental state, appreciation of the setting, motivation, and addiction dynamics. Correlations between self- and (unidimensional) carer-reports were low to moderate, but differential on the individual level. Scores of all four scales decreased during the course of treatment. The level of appreciation during the initial phase was the only significant predictor for drop-outs of treatment later on: in drop-outs, appreciation decreased, whereas it increased in completers.

CONCLUSION

Appreciation was the most important predictive factor for a regular therapy ending in SUD, whereas motivation showed fluctuations typical for adolescence. Addiction dynamics were of lesser relevance than commonly expected. Therefore, programs in long-term SUD treatment should focus more on improving appreciation than on issues of addiction itself.

Effectiveness of a multi-facetted blended eHealth intervention during intake supporting patients and clinicians in Shared Decision Making: A cluster randomised controlled trial in a specialist mental health outpatient setting

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effectiveness of a multi-facetted blended eHealth intervention, called SDM-Digital Intake (SDM-DI), in which patients and clinicians are supported in Shared Decision Making during the intake process.

METHODS

The study is a two-arm matched-paired cluster Randomised Controlled Trial in a specialist mental health outpatient setting with two conditions: SDM-DI and Intake As Usual (IAU). Four intake teams were allocated to each arm. All patients who followed an intake, were asked to participate if they were capable to complete questionnaires. Decisional Conflict (DC), referring to patients' engagement and satisfaction with clinical decisions, was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were patient participation, applying Shared Decision Making (SDM), working alliance, treatment adherence and symptom severity. Effects were measured at two weeks (T1) and two months (T2) after intake. Multilevel regression and intention-to-treat analyses were used. Additionally, the influence of subgroups and intervention adherence on DC were explored.

RESULTS

At T1, 200 patients participated (47% intervention, 53% control), and at T2 175 patients (47% intervention, 53% control). At T1 and T2, no differences were found between conditions on DC. Subgroup analyses showed that effects of SDM-DI on DC were not modified by primary diagnoses mood, anxiety and personality disorders. Compared to IAU, at T2, patients reported positive effects of SDM-DI on SDM (β 7.553, p = 0.038, 95%CI:0.403-14.703, d = 0.32) and reduction of symptoms (β -7.276, p = 0.0497, 95%CI:-14.544--0.008, d = -0.43). No effects were found on patient participation, working alliance and treatment adherence. Exploratory analyses demonstrated that if SDM was applied well, patients reported less DC (β = -0.457, p = 0.000, 95%CI:-0.518--0.396, d = -1.31), which was associated with better treatment outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Although, this trial fails to demonstrate that SDM-DI by itself is sufficient to reduce DC, the results are encouraging for further efforts in improving and implementing the SDM intervention.

Shared decision-making with involuntary hospital patients: a qualitative study of barriers and facilitators

BACKGROUND

Last year, there were more than 63 622 involuntary admissions to psychiatric hospitals in England. One of the core principles stipulated in the code of practice for care under the Mental Health Act is involving involuntary patients in care decisions.

AIMS

Identifying barriers and facilitators to shared decision-making with involuntary patients.

METHOD

Focus groups and individual interviews with patients and clinicians who have experience with involuntary hospital treatment were carried out. Data were subjected to thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-two patients and 16 clinicians participated. Barriers identified included challenges in communication, and noisy and busy wards making one-to-one meetings difficult. Patient involvement was identified as easier if initiated early after admission and if the whole clinical team was on board. Carers' presence helped decision-making through providing additional information and comfort.

CONCLUSIONS

The barriers and facilitators identified can inform changes in the practice of involuntary care to increase patient involvement.

DECLARATION OF INTEREST

None.

The effects of psychoeducational family intervention on coping strategies of relatives of patients with bipolar I disorder: results from a controlled, real-world, multicentric study

Background

Psychoeducational family intervention (PFI) has been proven to be effective in improving the levels of family burden and patients' personal functioning in schizophrenia and bipolar disorders (BDs). Less is known about the impact of PFI on relatives' coping strategies in BD.

Methods

A multicenter, controlled, outpatient trial funded by the Italian Ministry of Health and coordinated by the Department of Psychiatry of the University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" has been conducted in patients with bipolar I disorder (BD-I) and their key relatives consecutively recruited in 11 randomly selected Italian community mental health centers. We aim to test the hypothesis that PFI improves problem-oriented coping strategies in relatives of BD-I patients compared to the Treatment As Usual (TAU) group.

Results

The final sample was constituted of 123 patients and 139 relatives. At baseline assessment (T0), the vast majority of relatives already adopted problem-oriented coping strategies more frequently than the emotion-focused ones. At the end of the intervention, relatives receiving PFI reported a higher endorsement of adaptive coping strategies, such as "maintenance of social interests" (odds ratio [OR]=0.309, CI=0.04-0.57; p=0.023), "positive communication with the patient" (OR=0.295, CI=0.13-0.46; p=0.001), and "searching for information" (OR=0.443, CI=0.12-0.76; p=0.007), compared to TAU relatives, after controlling for several confounders. As regards the emotion-focused coping strategies, relatives receiving the experimental intervention less frequently reported to adopt "resignation" (OR=-0.380, CI=-0.68 to -0.08; p=0.014) and "coercion" (OR=-0.268, CI=-0.46 to -0.08; p=0.006) strategies, compared to TAU relatives.

Conclusion

PFI is effective in improving the adaptive coping strategies of relatives of BD-I patients, but further studies are needed for evaluating the long-term benefits of this intervention.

Choosing the appropriate treatment setting: which information and decision-making needs do adult inpatients with mental disorders have? A qualitative interview study

BACKGROUND

Decisions on medical treatment setting are perceived as important but often difficult to make for patients with mental disorders. Shared decision-making as a strategy to decrease decisional conflict has been recommended, but is not yet widely implemented. This study aimed to investigate the information needs and the decision-making preferences of patients with mental disorders prior to the decision for a certain treatment setting. The results will serve as a prerequisite for the development of a high-quality patient decision aid (PtDA) regarding the treatment setting decision.

METHODS

We conducted retrospective individual semi-structured interviews with n=24 patients with mental disorders in three psychotherapeutic inpatient care units. The interviews were audiotaped, transcribed, coded, and content-analyzed.

RESULTS

The majority of the patients wanted to be involved in the decision-making process. They reported high information needs regarding treatment options in order to feel empowered to participate adequately in the decision for a certain treatment setting. However, some patients did not want to participate or receive information, for example, because of their high burden of mental disorder. Whereas the majority were satisfied with the extent they were involved in the decision, few participants felt sufficiently informed about treatment options. Most patients reported that a decision aid regarding an appropriate treatment setting would have been helpful for them. Important information that should be included in a PtDA was general information about mental illness, effective treatment options, specific information about the different treatment settings, and access to treatment.

DISCUSSION

The identified information and decision-making needs provide a valuable basis for the development of a PtDA aiming to support patients and caregivers regarding the decision for an adequate treatment setting. As preferences for participation vary among patients and also depend on the current mental state, a flexible approach is needed to meet patients' individual wishes and needs.

Assessment and Management of Cognitive and Psychosocial Dysfunctions in Patients With Major Depressive Disorder: A Clinical Review

Background: Full functional recovery is defined as a state in which patients are again able to enjoy their usual activities, return to work, and take care of themselves, and it should represent the end goal of treatment in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). Patients with MDD report many unmet needs, including residual cognitive symptoms, lack of improvement in psychosocial functioning and life satisfaction, even during mood symptom remission. In this paper, we aim to: (a) identify the available assessment tools for evaluating cognitive and psychosocial functioning in patients with MDD; (b) provide an overview of therapeutic options that can improve full functional recovery in MDD also by improving cognitive symptoms. Methods: The relevant databases MEDLINE, ISI Web of Knowledge - Web of Science Index, Cochrane Reviews Library and PsychoINFO were searched for identifying papers on validated tools for the assessment of cognitive and personal functioning in patients with MDD. Results: New assessment tools (such as the THINC-it TOOL, the COBRA, the SCIP-D, and the UPSA-D) have been developed for evaluating the cognitive dysfunction in MDD patients. Adopting these tools in the clinical routine practice is useful to evaluate the improvement in cognitive functioning and, therefore, the achievement of full functioning recovery. The optimal management of patients with MDD include the combination of pharmacological compounds and psychosocial interventions for achieving full functional recovery in patients with MDD. Conclusions: Full functional recovery must be the target of any treatment programme for patients with MDD. In order to achieve this goal, it is necessary to develop personalized treatment and integrate psychosocial and psychopharmacological interventions.

Shared decision-making for psychiatric medication: A mixed-methods evaluation of a UK training programme for service users and clinicians

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) is recognised as a promising strategy to enhance good collaboration between clinicians and service users, yet it is not practised regularly in mental health.

AIMS

Develop and evaluate a novel training programme to enhance SDM in psychiatric medication management for service users, psychiatrists and care co-ordinators.

METHODS

The training programme design was informed by existing literature and local stakeholders consultations. Parallel group-based training programmes on SDM process were delivered to community mental health service users and providers. Evaluation consisted of quantitative measures at baseline and 12-month follow-up, post-programme participant feedback and qualitative interviews.

RESULTS

Training was provided to 47 service users, 35 care-coordinators and 12 psychiatrists. Participant feedback was generally positive. Statistically significant changes in service users' decisional conflict and perceptions of practitioners' interactional style in promoting SDM occurred at the follow-up. Qualitative data suggested positive impacts on service users' and care co-ordinators confidence to explore medication experience, and group-based training was valued.

CONCLUSIONS

The programme was generally acceptable to service users and practitioners. This indicates the value of conducting a larger study and exploring application for non-medical decisions.

Satisfaction of psychotic patients with care and its value to predict outcomes

BACKGROUND

A key indicator of quality of treatment from the patient's perspective is expressed by satisfaction with care. Our aim was to (i) explore satisfaction and its relation to clinical outcome measures; and (ii) explore the predictive value of satisfaction for the course of outcomes over three years.

METHODS

Data of 654 patients with a non-affective psychosis included in a naturalistic longitudinal cohort study were analyzed. We included 506 males and 148 females with a mean age of 30.47 (SD 7.24) from The Netherlands. Satisfaction was measured with the self-rating Client Satisfaction Questionnaire-8. A wide range of interviewer-rated (e.g., Positive and Negative Symptom Scale) and self-rated (e.g., World Health Organization Quality of Life); outcomes of low, intermediate and high satisfied patients were compared using ANOVA, Chi² or Kruskal-Wallis tests. The predictive value of satisfaction level on clinical outcomes after three years was tested using regression models.

RESULTS

Satisfaction levels were low (19.4%), intermediate (48.9%) or high (31.7%). High satisfied patients showed significantly better interviewer-rated outcomes, e.g., less severe psychotic symptoms, and self-rated outcomes, e.g., better quality of life, compared to patients with intermediate or low satisfaction. Higher levels of satisfaction with care at baseline predicted a reduction of positive symptoms three years later (B=-.09, P-value=.013).

CONCLUSIONS

Satisfaction of patients with psychosis is a valuable monitoring measure since high satisfied patients show more favorable outcomes ranging from psychopathological symptoms to quality of life. Further research into explanations of lower levels of satisfaction is commendable in order to improve outcomes.

Predicting the preferences for involvement in medical decision making among patients with mental disorders

BACKGROUND

The involvement of patients in medical decision making has been investigated widely in somatic diseases. However, little is known about the preferences for involvement and variables that could predict these preferences in patients with mental disorders.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to determine what roles mentally ill patients actually want to assume when making medical decisions and to identify the variables that could predict this role, including patients' self-efficacy.

METHOD

Demographic and clinical data of 798 patients with mental disorders from three psychotherapeutic units in Germany were elicited using self-report questionnaires. Control preference was measured using the Control Preferences Scale, and patients' perceived self-efficacy was assessed using the Self-Efficacy Scale. Bivariate and multivariate regression analyses were conducted to investigate the associations between patient variables and control preference.

RESULTS

Most patients preferred a collaborative role (57.5%), followed by a semi passive (21.2%), a partly autonomous (16.2%), an autonomous (2.8%) and a fully passive (2.3%) role when making medical decisions. Age, sex, diagnosis, employment status, medical pretreatment and perceived self-efficacy were associated with the preference for involvement in the multivariate logistic model.

CONCLUSION

Our results confirm the preferences for involvement in medical decisions of mentally ill patients. We reconfirmed previous findings that older patients prefer a shared role over an autonomous role and that subjects with a high qualification prefer a more autonomous role over a shared role. The knowledge about predictors may help strengthen treatment effectiveness because matching the preferred and actual role preferences has been shown to improve clinical outcome.

Implementing shared decision making in routine mental health care

Shared decision making (SDM) in mental health care involves clinicians and patients working together to make decisions. The key elements of SDM have been identified, decision support tools have been developed, and SDM has been recommended in mental health at policy level. Yet implementation remains limited. Two justifications are typically advanced in support of SDM. The clinical justification is that SDM leads to improved outcome, yet the available empirical evidence base is inconclusive. The ethical justification is that SDM is a right, but clinicians need to balance the biomedical ethical principles of autonomy and justice with beneficence and non-maleficence. It is argued that SDM is "polyvalent", a sociological concept which describes an idea commanding superficial but not deep agreement between disparate stakeholders. Implementing SDM in routine mental health services is as much a cultural as a technical problem. Three challenges are identified: creating widespread access to high-quality decision support tools; integrating SDM with other recovery-supporting interventions; and responding to cultural changes as patients develop the normal expectations of citizenship. Two approaches which may inform responses in the mental health system to these cultural changes - social marketing and the hospitality industry - are identified.

Helping Alliance and Unmet Needs in Routine Care of People With Severe Mental Illness Across Europe: A Prospective Longitudinal Multicenter Study

The helping alliance (HA) refers to the collaborative bond between patient and therapist, including shared goals and tasks. People with severe mental illness have a complex mixture of clinical and social needs. Using mixed-effects regression, this study examined in 588 people with severe mental illness whether an increase in the HA is associated with fewer unmet needs over time, and whether change in the HA precedes change in unmet needs. It was found that a reduction in unmet needs was slower in patients with higher HA (B = 0.04, p < 0.0001) only for patient-rated measures. Improvement in both patient-rated and staff-rated HA over time was associated with fewer subsequent patient-rated (B = -0.10, p < 0.0001) and staff-rated (B = -0.08, p = 0.0175) unmet needs. With positive changes in the HA preceding fewer unmet needs, findings provide further evidence for a causal relationship between alliance and outcome in the treatment of people with severe mental illness.

Shared decision making PLUS - a cluster-randomized trial with inpatients suffering from schizophrenia (SDM-PLUS)

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) is a model of how doctors and patients interact with each other. It aims at changing the traditional power asymmetry between doctors and patients by strengthening the exchange of information and the decisional position of the patient. Although SDM is generally welcomed by mental health patients as well as by mental health professionals its implementation in routine care, especially in the more acute settings, is still lacking. SDM-PLUS has been developed as an approach that addresses both patients and mental health professionals and aims at implementing SDM even for the very acutely ill patients.

METHODS

The SDM-PLUS study will be performed as a matched-pair cluster-randomized trial in acute psychiatric wards. On wards allocated to the intervention group personnel will receive communication training (addressing how to implement SDM for various scenarios) and patients will receive a group intervention addressing patient skills for SDM. Wards allocated to the control condition will continue treatment as usual. A total sample size of 276 patients suffering from schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder on 12 wards is planned. The main outcome parameter will be patients' perceived involvement in decision making during the inpatient stay measured with the SDM-Q-9 questionnaire. Secondary objectives include the therapeutic relationship and long term outcomes such as medication adherence and rehospitalization rates. In addition, process measures and qualitative data will be obtained to allow for the analysis of potential barriers and facilitators of SDM-PLUS. The primary analysis will be a comparison of SDM-Q-9 sum scores 3 weeks after study inclusion (or discharge, if earlier) between the intervention and control groups. To assess the effect of the intervention on this continuous primary outcome, a random effects linear regression model will be fitted with ward (cluster) as a random effect term and intervention group as a fixed effect.

DISCUSSION

This will be the first trial examining the SDM-PLUS approach for patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder in very acute mental health inpatient settings. Within the trial a complex intervention will be implemented that addresses both patients and health care staff to yield maximum effects.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00010880 . Registered 09 August 2016.

Recovery and decision-making involvement in people with severe mental illness from six countries: a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Clinical decision-making is the vehicle of health care provision, and level of involvement predicts implementation and satisfaction. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of decision-making experience on recovery.

METHODS

Data derived from an observational cohort study "Clinical decision making and outcome in routine care for people with severe mental illness" (CEDAR). Adults (aged 18-60) meeting standardised criteria for severe mental illness were recruited from caseloads of outpatient and community mental health services in six European countries. After consenting, they were assessed using standardised measures of decision-making, clinical outcome and stage of recovery at baseline and 1 year later. Latent class analysis was used to identify course of recovery, and proportional odds models to investigate predictors of recovery stage and change.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 581) clustered into three stages of recovery at baseline: Moratorium (N = 115; 19.8%), Awareness/Preparation (N = 145; 25.0%) and Rebuilding/Growth (N = 321; 55.2%). Higher stage was cross-sectionally associated with being male, married, living alone or with parents, and having better patient-rated therapeutic alliance and fewer symptoms. The model accounted for 40% of the variance in stage of recovery. An increased chance of worse outcome (change over 1 year to lower stage of recovery) was found for patients with active involvement compared with either shared (OR = 1.84, 95% CI 1.15-2.94) or passive (OR = 1.71, 95% CI = 1.00-2.95) involvement. Overall, both process (therapeutic relationship) and outcome (symptomatology) are cross-sectionally associated with stage of recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient-rated decision-making involvement and change in stage of recovery are associated. Joint consideration of decision practise within the recovery process between patient and clinician is supposed to be a useful strategy to improve clinical practice (ISRCTN registry: ISRCTN75841675. Retrospectively registered 15 September 2010).

From providing a service to being of service: advances in person-centred care in mental health

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review explores the concept of person-centred care, giving particular attention to its application in mental health and its relationship to recovery. It then outlines a framework for understanding the variety of approaches that have been used to operationalize person-centred care, focusing particularly on shared decision-making and self-directed care, two practices that have significant implications for mental health internationally.

RECENT FINDINGS

Despite growing recognition of person-centred care as an essential component of recovery-orientated practice, the levels of uptake of shared decision-making and self-directed care in mental health remain low. The most significant barrier appears to be the challenge presented to service providers by one of the key principles of person-centred care, namely empowerment.

SUMMARY

Shared decision-making and self-directed support, two practices based upon the principles of person-centred care, have the potential for being effective tools for recovery. Full engagement of clinicians is crucial for their successful uptake into practice. More research is needed to address both outcomes and implementation.

Participation in medical decision-making across Europe: An international longitudinal multicenter study

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this paper was to examine national differences in the desire to participate in decision-making of people with severe mental illness in six European countries.

METHODS

The data was taken from a European longitudinal observational study (CEDAR; ISRCTN75841675). A sample of 514 patients with severe mental illness from the study centers in Ulm, Germany, London, England, Naples, Italy, Debrecen, Hungary, Aalborg, Denmark and Zurich, Switzerland were assessed as to desire to participate in medical decision-making. Associations between desire for participation in decision-making and center location were analyzed with generalized estimating equations.

RESULTS

We found large cross-national differences in patients' desire to participate in decision-making, with the center explaining 47.2% of total variance in the desire for participation (P<0.001). Averaged over time and independent of patient characteristics, London (mean=2.27), Ulm (mean=2.13) and Zurich (mean=2.14) showed significantly higher scores in desire for participation, followed by Aalborg (mean=1.97), where scores were in turn significantly higher than in Debrecen (mean=1.56). The lowest scores were reported in Naples (mean=1.14). Over time, the desire for participation in decision-making increased significantly in Zurich (b=0.23) and decreased in Naples (b=-0.14). In all other centers, values remained stable.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that patients' desire for participation in decision-making varies by location. We suggest that more research attention be focused on identifying specific cultural and social factors in each country to further explain observed differences across Europe.