Ropaj E, Haddock G, Pratt D. Developing a consensus of recovery from suicidal ideations and behaviours: A Delphi study with experts by experience.
PLoS One 2023;
18:e0291377. [PMID:
37729121 PMCID:
PMC10511083 DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0291377]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/25/2022] [Accepted: 08/28/2023] [Indexed: 09/22/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Understanding recovery in mental health has received significant attention and consequently, recovery has been incorporated into health policy across many countries in the Global North. In comparison, the concept of 'recovery' from suicidal thoughts and behaviours has received little attention. However, the few studies in this area appear to suggest that recovery is a complex and an idiosyncratic process with many contributing factors. This can present a challenge for clinicians and services seeking to become more recovery focused. Thus, it seems of importance to develop a consensus on how recovery from suicidal thoughts and behaviours is conceptualised.
AIM
The study aimed to use the Delphi design to establish a consensus of how recovery is defined by those with lived experience of suicidal thoughts and behaviours. The Delphi method draws on the expertise of a panel, often involving clinicians, researchers and lived experience experts to develop consensus over a topic by inviting them to rate the importance of, often a series of statements to a given topic area.
METHOD
Lived experience experts were asked to complete two rounds of questionnaires distributed online to capture their views on recovery.
RESULTS
A total of 196 individuals gave their views on the first round of the study and 97 gave their views on the second round. A final list of 110 statements was developed that 80% or more of participants defined as essential or important. Statements covered items that were important in defining, facilitation and hindering the process of recovery.
CONCLUSION
Findings are consistent with the wider literature that suggests that recovery is an idiosyncratic process, but with many commonly shared features. Here we also show that a comprehensive definition of recovery must include factors that hinder the process of recovery. Implications and recommendations for practice, policy development and future research are discussed.
Collapse