Cross-national comparative mixed-methods case study of recovery-focused mental health care planning and co-ordination: Collaborative Care Planning Project (COCAPP)

Psychosocial Care Delivery in Intensive Home Treatment During a Mental Health Crisis: A Qualitative Thematic Analysis

Community-based intensive home treatment (IHT) is delivered as an alternative to psychiatric hospital admission as part of crisis resolution services. People receiving IHT present with complex mental health issues and are acutely distressed. Home treatment options are often preferred and there is evidence of service fidelity, although less is known about psychosocial care in this setting. Underpinned by a critical realist epistemology, this study aimed to explore psychosocial care in the context of home treatment from the perspectives of staff, service users and family carers. Data were collected using individual interviews and focus groups in two NHS organisations in England. An inductive qualitative thematic analysis resulted in five themes focused on (1) the staffing model and effective care provision, (2) the organisation of work and effective care provision, (3) skills and training and service user need, (4) opportunities for involvement and personal choice, and (5) effective communication. Findings suggest that co-production may improve congruence between IHT service design, what service users and carers want and staff ideals about optimal care. Service designs that optimise continuity of care and effective communication were advocated. Staff training in therapeutic interventions was limited by not being tailored to the home treatment context. Evidence gaps remain regarding the most effective psychosocial care and related training and supervision required. There is also a lack of clarity about how carers and family members ought to be supported given their often-crucial role in supporting the person between staff visits.

Explanation of context, mechanisms and outcomes in adult community mental health crisis care: the MH-CREST realist evidence synthesis

Background

Mental health crises cause significant disruption to individuals and families and can be life-threatening. The large number of community crisis services operating in an inter-agency landscape complicates access to help. It is unclear which underpinning mechanisms of crisis care work, for whom and in which circumstances.

Aim

The aim was to identify mechanisms to explain how, for whom and in what circumstances adult community crisis services work.

Objectives

The objectives were to develop, test and synthesise programme theories via (1) stakeholder expertise and current evidence; (2) a context, intervention, mechanism and outcome framework; (3) consultation with experts; (4) development of pen portraits; (5) synthesis and refinement of programme theories, including mid-range theory; and (6) identification and dissemination of mechanisms needed to trigger desired context-specific crisis outcomes.

Design

This study is a realist evidence synthesis, comprising (1) identification of initial programme theories; (2) prioritisation, testing and refinement of programme theories; (3) focused realist reviews of prioritised initial programme theories; and (4) synthesis to mid-range theory.

Main outcome

The main outcome was to explain context, mechanisms and outcomes in adult community mental health crisis care.

Data sources

Data were sourced via academic and grey literature searches, expert stakeholder group consultations and 20 individual realist interviews with experts.

Review methods

A realist evidence synthesis with primary data was conducted to test and refine three initial programme theories: (1) urgent and accessible crisis care, (2) compassionate and therapeutic crisis care and (3) inter-agency working.

Results

Community crisis services operate best within an inter-agency system. This requires compassionate leadership and shared values that enable staff to be supported; retain their compassion; and, in turn, facilitate compassionate interventions for people in crisis. The complex interface between agencies is best managed through greater clarity at the boundaries of services, making referral and transition seamless and timely. This would facilitate ease of access and guaranteed responses that are trusted by the communities they serve.

Strengths and limitations

Strengths include the identification of mechanisms for effective inter-agency community crisis care and meaningful stakeholder consultation that grounded the theories in real-life experience. Limitations include the evidence being heavily weighted towards England and the review scope excluding full analysis of ethnic and cultural diversity.

Conclusions

Multiple interpretations of crises and diverse population needs present challenges for improving the complex pathways to help in a crisis. Inter-agency working requires clear policy guidance with local commissioning. Seamless transitions between services generate trust through guaranteed responses and ease of navigation. This is best achieved where there is inter-agency affiliation that supports co-production. Compassionate leaders engender staff trust, and outcomes for people in crisis improve when staff are supported to retain their compassion.

Future work

Further work might explore inter-agency models of crisis delivery, particularly in rural communities. Future work could focus on evaluating outcomes across crisis care provider agencies and include evaluation of individual, as well as service-level, outcomes. The implementation and effect of mental health triage could be explored further, including via telehealth. Barriers to access for marginalised populations warrant a specific focus in future research.

Study registration

The study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019141680.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 11, No. 15. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Embedding coproduction in organisational culture and practice: a case study

PURPOSE

This paper aims to explore the challenges of coproduction at individual, team, service, organisational and system level and critically describes the work of one organization to describe ways in which coproduction can be facilitated.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

This is a case study of the approaches developed (coproduced) within an independent not-for-profit mental health consultancy organization to facilitate coproduction at every level.

FINDINGS

Although much is published about coproduction in research, there is relatively little guidance relating to coproduction in practice. This paper describes the meaning, purpose and impact of coproduction at different levels and gives examples of how it can be achieved. The learning from his work is drawn together to present a series of findings with recommendations including: inclusion, managing power difference, accommodating difference, generating new ways forward rather than debating and selecting existing options.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

The literature on coproduction in practice is replete with guidance rather than examples of good practice. It is also apparent that the ambition for coproduction has progressed rapidly from coproduction between service providers and people using services to coproduction with all relevant stakeholders. This paper provides contemporary examples of coproduction in different forms and at different levels with attention to ways of overcoming challenges.

The challenges and necessity of situating 'illness narratives' in recovery and mental health treatment

In mental health services, recovery constitutes a guiding principle that is endorsed in professional medical guidelines and has become central to mental health policies across the world. However, for many clinicians, it can be a challenge to effectively embed recovery concepts into professionally directed treatment of disease without distortion, and ostensibly away from what matters to those who use the services. We discuss the evolving and multifaceted concept of 'recovery', including illness narratives to frame our discussion. We demonstrate how integration between a person-directed management of illness and a professionally directed treatment of disease can converge, resulting in positive outcomes for people with mental illness.

Observations from a small country: mental health policy, services and nursing in Wales

Wales is a small country, with an ageing population, high levels of population health need and an economy with a significant reliance on public services. Its health system attracts little attention, with analyses tending to underplay the differences between the four countries of the UK. This paper helps redress this via a case study of Welsh mental health policy, services and nursing practice. Distinctively, successive devolved governments in Wales have emphasised public planning and provision. Wales also has primary legislation addressing sustainability and future generations, safe nurse staffing and rights of access to mental health services. However, in a context in which gaps always exist between national policy, local services and face-to-face care, evidence points to the existence of tension between Welsh policy aspirations and realities. Mental health nurses in Wales have produced a framework for action, which describes practice exemplars and looks forward to a secure future for the profession. With policy, however enlightened, lacking the singular potency to bring about intended change, nurses as the largest of the professional groups involved in mental health care have opportunities to make a difference in Wales through leadership, influence and collective action.

Clinical- and cost-effectiveness of a technology-supported and solution-focused intervention (DIALOG+) in treatment of patients with chronic depression-study protocol for a multi-site, cluster randomised controlled trial [TACK]

Background

Many with an acute depressive disorder go on to develop chronic depression, despite ongoing care. There are few specifically designed interventions to treat chronic depression. DIALOG+, a technology-assisted intervention based on the principles of solution-focused therapy, may be beneficial. It has been shown to be effective as a treatment for patients with psychotic disorders, especially in regards to increasing quality of life. DIALOG+ was designed to be flexibly applied and not diagnosis-specific, aiming to structure communication and generate a personally-tailored care plan. This cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) is part of a programme of research to adapt and test DIALOG+ for patients with chronic depression.

Methods

Patients will be eligible for the trial, if they have exhibited symptoms of depression or non-psychotic low mood for at least 2 years, have regular contact with a clinician and have a low subjective quality of life and moderate depressive symptoms. Clinicians, who routinely see eligible patients, will be recruited from a number of sites across NHS England. Clusters will have between 1 and 6 patients per clinician and will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to either the intervention (DIALOG+) or active control group (treatment as usual + DIALOG scale). Clinicians in the intervention group are trained and asked to deliver the intervention regularly for 12 months. Active control participants receive treatment as usual and are asked to rate their satisfaction with areas of life and treatment on the DIALOG scale at the end of the clinical session. Approximately 112 clinician clusters will be recruited to reach a total patient sample size of 376. Clinical and social outcomes including costs are assessed at baseline and 3, 6 and 12 months post randomisation. The primary outcome will be subjective quality of life at 12 months.

Discussion

This definitive multi-site, cluster RCT aims to evaluate the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of DIALOG+ for people with chronic depression. If shown to be effective for this patient population it could be used to improve outcomes of mental health care on a larger scale, ensuring that patients with complex and co-morbid diagnoses can benefit.

Trial registration

ISRCTN11301686. Registered on 13 Jun 2019.

Mental health professionals' perceived barriers and enablers to shared decision-making in risk assessment and risk management: a qualitative systematic review

BACKGROUND

Risk assessment and risk management are fundamental processes in the delivery of safe and effective mental health care, yet studies have shown that service users are often not directly involved or are unaware that an assessment has taken place. Shared decision-making in mental health systems is supported by research and advocated in policy. This systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42016050457) aimed to explore the perceived barriers and enablers to implementing shared decision-making in risk assessment and risk management from mental health professionals' perspectives.

METHODS

PRISMA guidelines were followed in the conduct and reporting of this review. Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, AMED and Internurse were systematically searched from inception to December 2019. Data were mapped directly into the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), a psychological framework that includes 14 domains relevant to behaviour change. Thematic synthesis was used to identify potential barriers and enablers within each domain. Data were then matched to the three components of the COM-B model: Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation.

RESULTS

Twenty studies met the eligibility criteria. The findings of this review indicate that shared decision-making is not a concept commonly used in mental health services when exploring processes of risk assessment and risk management. The key barriers identified were 'power and best interest' (social influences) and 'my professional role and responsibility' (social/professional role and identity). Key enablers were 'therapeutic relationship' (social influences) and 'value collaboration' (reinforcement). The salient barriers, enablers and linked TDF domains matched COM-B components 'opportunity' and 'motivation'.

CONCLUSION

The review highlights the need for further empirical research to better understand current practice and mental health professionals' experiences and attitudes towards shared decision-making in risk assessment and risk management.

Convergent and Concurrent Validity between Clinical Recovery and Personal-Civic Recovery in Mental Health

Several instruments have been developed by clinicians and academics to assess clinical recovery. Based on their life narratives, measurement tools have also been developed and validated through participatory research programs by persons living with mental health problems or illnesses to assess personal recovery. The main objective of this project is to explore possible correlations between clinical recovery, personal recovery, and citizenship by using patient-reported outcome measures. All study participants are currently being treated and monitored after having been diagnosed either with (a) psychotic disorders or (b) anxiety and mood disorders. They have completed questionnaires for clinical evaluation purposes (clinical recovery) will further complete the Recovery Assessment Scale and Citizenship Measure (personal-civic recovery composite index). Descriptive and statistical analyses will be performed to determine internal consistency for each of the subscales, and assess convergent-concurrent validity between clinical recovery, citizenship and personal recovery. Recovery-oriented mental health care and services are particularly recognizable by the presence of Peer Support Workers, who are persons with lived experience of recovery. Upon training, they can personify personalized mental health care and services, that is to say services that are centered on the person's recovery project and not only on their symptoms. Data from our overall research strategy will lay the ground for the evaluation of the effects of the intervention of Peer Support Workers on clinical recovery, citizenship and personal recovery.

Recovery as a process: Exploring definitions of recovery in the context of eating-disorder-related social media forums

OBJECTIVE

Online forums related to eating disorders (EDs) represent sources of support for recovery, and comments on these platforms might therefore highlight aspects of recovery that have been previously neglected in research. Reddit, an online discussion platform, hosts several ED-related forums. Due to the unique benefits of examining ED-related social media comments, we aimed to use a qualitative approach to conduct an exploratory study to examine users' conceptualizations of recovery from an ED.

METHOD

We extracted public comments mentioning recovery that were posted on three ED-related online forums on Reddit between March 2017 and August 2017. We thematically analyzed the data corpus using an inductive approach to examine how recovery is defined in the context of ED-related online communities.

RESULTS

Two superordinate themes ("Recovery as a Process," "Psychosocial Factors") and three subordinate themes emerged (within the "Psychosocial Factors" theme: cognitive/affective, behavioral/physical, social).

DISCUSSION

The data support a definition of recovery that includes positive aspects of well-being and quality of life. Furthermore, the data highlight that recovery is experienced as an ongoing process that is unique to each individual.

A heuristic model for collaborative practice-part 2: development of the collaborative, dialogue-based clinical practice model for community mental health and substance abuse care

BACKGROUND

Various models for collaborative practice in mental health care incorporating the perspectives of service-user participation and collaboration in the care have been developed. However, the emphasis in these practice models has not been on identifying specific features of "how" collaboration and service-user participation can occur and be nurtured. This suggests a need for a collaborative practice model that specifies essential strategies operationalizing the tenets of service-user participation and collaboration applicable in mental health and substance abuse (MHSA) care.

METHODS

A double helix approach of coalescing theoretical ideas and empirical findings to develop a practice model that is applicable in MHSA practice. A theoretical analysis is carried out to identify the critical, foundational elements for collaborative practice in MHSA practice, and has identified the philosophical-theoretical orientations of Habermas' theory of communicative action, Bakhtin's dialogicality, and the philosophy of personhood as the foundational features of collaboration. This base is juxtaposed with the results of a qualitative meta-analysis of 18 empirical articles on collaboration in MHSA to advance a collaborative practice model specifically in the domain of service user/professional collaboration.

RESULTS

"The collaborative, dialogue-based clinical practice model" (CDCP Model) for community mental health care is proposed, within the structure of four main components. The first specifies the framework for practice that includes person-centered care, recovery-orientation, and a pluralistic orientation and the second identifies the domains of collaboration as service user/professional collaboration, inter-professional collaboration, and service sector collaboration. The third identifies self-understanding, mutual understanding, and shared decision-making as the essential principles of collaboration. The fourth specifies interactive-dialogic processes, negotiated-participatory engagement processes, and negotiated-supportive processes as the essential strategies of collaboration applicable in service user/professional collaboration which were extracted in the empirical work. An illustration of the CDCP Model in a clinical case is given.

CONCLUSIONS

The CDCP Model presented fills the gap that exists in the field of community MHSA practice regarding how to operationalize systematically the tenets of person-centeredness, recovery-oriented, and pluralism-oriented practice in terms of user/professional collaboration.

Implementing a Digital Tool to Support Shared Care Planning in Community-Based Mental Health Services: Qualitative Evaluation

BACKGROUND

Mental health services aim to provide recovery-focused care and facilitate coproduced care planning. In practice, mental health providers can find supporting individualized coproduced care with service users difficult while balancing administrative and performance demands. To help meet this aim and using principles of coproduction, an innovative mobile digital care pathway tool (CPT) was developed to be used on a tablet computer and piloted in the West of England.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to examine mental health care providers' views of and experiences with the CPT during the pilot implementation phase and identify factors influencing its implementation.

METHODS

A total of 20 in-depth telephone interviews were conducted with providers participating in the pilot and managers in the host organization. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, anonymized, and thematically analyzed guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

RESULTS

The tool was thought to facilitate coproduced recovery-focused care planning, a policy and organizational as well as professional priority. Internet connectivity issues, system interoperability, and access to service users' health records affected use of the tool during mobile working. The organization's resources, such as information technology (IT) infrastructure and staff time and IT culture, influenced implementation. Participants' levels of use of the tool were dependent on knowledge of the tool and self-efficacy; perceived service-user needs and characteristics; and perceptions of impact on the therapeutic relationship. Training and preparation time influenced participants' confidence in using the tool.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings highlight the importance of congruence between staff, organization, and external policy priorities and digital technologies in aiding intervention engagement, and the need for ongoing training and support of those intended to use the technology during and after the end of implementation interventions.

Interventions delivered by nurses in adult outpatient psychiatric care: An integrative review

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: In many countries, the majority of psychiatric care is being delivered in an outpatient setting and the proportion of outpatients is increasing on a global level. Nurses are the largest workforce in psychiatric care, but their role has been said to be difficult to define. According to our knowledge, there are no previous reviews focusing on nurse-delivered interventions in the adult psychiatric outpatient setting. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: This review summarizes nurse-delivered interventions identified in the research literature and describes these systematically. Analysing all the identified interventions using the Nursing Interventions Classification, we conclude that the emphasis of nurse-delivered interventions in psychiatric outpatient care is on interventions aiming at improving the functioning of both patients and their family members by building on their own strengths. These findings differ from those presented in a review on inpatient psychiatric nursing. There are several clinical trials describing nurse-delivered evidence-based treatments, such as psychoeducation for patients and their family members in the case of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. The quality of randomized controlled trials was higher than in earlier reviews describing psychiatric nursing interventions in general or in connection with a specific patient group. Further clinical trials are needed to describe the role of nurses in the care of patients diagnosed with depression and in the use of web-based interventions. Additionally, it would be important to study what supports, and on the other hand hinders, the role of nurses in delivering evidence-based treatments at the clinical level. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: Nurses can play a central role in responding to the growing demand for evidence-based practices in adult outpatient psychiatry, by delivering treatments for patients and family members. It is important that both nursing education and clinical practices recognize and support this role. Abstract Introduction According to our knowledge, there are no previous reviews on nurse-delivered interventions in the adult psychiatric outpatient setting. Aim To identify and systematically describe and analyse nurse-delivered interventions based on research literature. Method An integrative review. Results This review included 60 studies, of which 46 were intervention studies, including 40 clinical trials. The most common patient groups were patients diagnosed with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. The nursing interventions described in the studies resembled a total of 68 interventions from the Nursing Interventions Classification. The treatment delivery methods varied and treatments often lacked a clear theoretical background. Implications for practice The core of nurse-delivered interventions identified in research literature in psychiatric outpatient care is on interventions aiming at improving the functioning of both patients and their family members by building on their own strengths. These findings differ from the interventions identified in a review describing nursing in the inpatient setting. There are high-quality clinical trials describing nurse-delivered treatments for patients diagnosed with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. These include evidence-based treatments such as psychoeducation. Understanding of how these treatments are transferred in clinical practice is missing. Clinical trials describing nurse-delivered web-based interventions and interventions for patients diagnosed with depression are needed.

'Dignity and respect': An example of service user leadership and co-production in mental health research

This paper explores the methodological aspects of a user‐led study investigating mental health service user experiences of targeted violence and abuse (often called 'hate crime'). 'Keeping Control' was a 16‐month qualitative study, undertaken in the context of adult safeguarding reforms in England. By collecting data on service user concepts and experiences, the research sought to address a gap in research and practice knowledge relating to targeted violence, abuse and hostility against people with mental health problems. In this paper, we discuss the significance of the design and methodology used for this study, with a particular focus on the interviews with service users. The research was both user‐led and carried out in collaboration with practitioners and academics, a form of research co‐production. Our aim is to inform researchers, practitioners and policymakers about the value of user leadership in co‐productive research with practitioners, particularly for a highly sensitive and potentially distressing topic.

Involving carers in risk assessment: a study of a structured dialogue between mental health nurses and carers

Background

Involving carers is a key priority in mental health services. Carers report the sharing of service users' safety information by mental health nurses is problematic and seldom takes place.

Aims

The impact of an intervention on consensus between nurses and carers on perceptions of risk was investigated.

Methods

Carer-nurse risk consensus scores were measured pre- and post-introduction of a structured dialogue (paired t-test/ANOVA). Carer experience with involvement was surveyed pre-test (n = 60) and compared with the post-test intervention group (n = 32) (chi-square tests of linear-by-linear association).

Results

Consensus and perceptions regarding type and severity of risk did not change significantly for carers or nurses after engaging in a structured dialogue. Statistically significant differences were found with carers reporting higher levels of satisfaction with services in four out of six areas surveyed.

Conclusions

Findings provide support for increasing carer contribution to discussions regarding risk. Further work to embed carer involvement in clinical practice is warranted.

Recovery-focused mental health care planning and co-ordination in acute inpatient mental health settings: a cross national comparative mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

Involving mental health service users in planning and reviewing their care can help personalised care focused on recovery, with the aim of developing goals specific to the individual and designed to maximise achievements and social integration. We aimed to ascertain the views of service users, carers and staff in acute inpatient wards on factors that facilitated or acted as barriers to collaborative, recovery-focused care.

METHODS

A cross-national comparative mixed-methods study involving 19 mental health wards in six service provider sites in England and Wales. This included a survey using established standardised measures of service users (n = 301) and staff (n = 290) and embedded case studies involving interviews with staff, service users and carers (n = 76). Quantitative and qualitative data were analysed within and across sites using descriptive and inferential statistics, and framework method.

RESULTS

For service users, when recovery-oriented focus was high, the quality of care was rated highly, as was the quality of therapeutic relationships. For staff, there was a moderate correlation between recovery orientation and quality of therapeutic relationships, with considerable variability. Staff members rated the quality of therapeutic relationships higher than service users did. Staff accounts of routine collaboration contrasted with a more mixed picture in service user accounts. Definitions and understandings of recovery varied, as did views of hospital care in promoting recovery. Managing risk was a central issue for staff, and service users were aware of measures taken to keep them safe, although their involvement in discussions was less apparent.

CONCLUSIONS

There is positive practice within acute inpatient wards, with evidence of commitment to safe, respectful, compassionate care. Recovery ideas were evident but there remained ambivalence on their relevance to inpatient care. Service users were aware of efforts taken to keep them safe, but despite measures described by staff, they did not feel routinely involved in care planning or risk management decisions. Research on increasing therapeutic contact time, shared decision making in risk assessment and using recovery focused tools could further promote personalised and recovery-focused care planning. This paper arises from a larger study published by National Institute for Health Research (Simpson A, et al, Health Serv Deliv Res 5(26), 2017).

Traditions of research in community mental health care planning and care coordination: A systematic meta-narrative review of the literature

CONTEXT

In response to political and social factors over the last sixty years mental health systems internationally have endeavoured to transfer the delivery of care from hospitals into community settings. As a result, there has been increased emphasis on the need for better quality care planning and care coordination between hospital services, community services and patients and their informal carers. The aim of this systematic review of international research is to explore which interventions have proved more or less effective in promoting personalized, recovery oriented care planning and coordination for community mental health service users.

METHODS

A systematic meta-narrative review of research from 1990 to the present was undertaken. From an initial return of 3940 papers a total of 50 research articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria, including research from the UK, Australia and the USA.

FINDINGS

Three research traditions are identified consisting of (a) research that evaluates the effects of government policies on the organization, management and delivery of services; (b) evaluations of attempts to improve organizational and service delivery efficiency; (c) service-users and carers experiences of community mental health care coordination and planning and their involvement in research. The review found no seminal papers in terms of high citation rates, or papers that were consistently cited over time. The traditions of research in this topic area have formed reactively in response to frequent and often unpredictable policy changes, rather than proactively as a result of intrinsic academic or intellectual activity. This may explain the absence of seminal literature within the subject field. As a result, the research tradition within this specific area of mental health service delivery has a relatively short history, with no one dominant researcher or researchers, tradition or seminal studies amongst or across the three traditions identified.

CONCLUSIONS

The research findings reviewed suggests a gap has existed internationally over several decades between policy aspirations and service level interventions aimed at improving personalised care planning and coordination and the realities of everyday practices and experiences of service users and carers. Substantial barriers to involvement are created through poor information exchange and insufficient opportunities for care negotiation.

Cross-national mixed-methods comparative case study of recovery-focused mental health care planning and co-ordination in acute inpatient mental health settings (COCAPP-A)

Background

Mental health service users in acute inpatient wards, whether informal or detained, should be involved in planning and reviewing their care. Care planning processes should be personalised and focused on recovery, with goals that are specific to the individual and designed to maximise their achievements and social integration.

Objective(s)

We aimed to ascertain the views and experiences of service users, carers and staff to enable us to identify factors that facilitated or acted as barriers to collaborative, recovery-focused care and to make suggestions for future research.

Design

A cross-national comparative mixed-methods study involving 19 mental health wards in six NHS sites in England and Wales included a metanarrative synthesis of policies and literature; a survey of service users (n = 301) and staff (n = 290); embedded case studies involving interviews with staff, service users and carers (n = 76); and a review of care plans (n = 51) and meetings (n = 12).

Results

No global differences were found across the sites in the scores of the four questionnaires completed by service users. For staff, there was significant difference between sites in mean scores on recovery-orientation and therapeutic relationships. For service users, when recovery-orientated focus was high, the quality of care was viewed highly, as was the quality of therapeutic relationships. For staff, there was a moderate correlation between recovery orientation and quality of therapeutic relationships, with considerable variability. Across all sites, staff’s scores were significantly higher than service users’ scores on the scale to assess therapeutic relationships. Staff across the sites spoke of the importance of collaborative care planning. However, the staff, service user and carer interviews revealed gaps between shared aspirations and realities. Staff accounts of routine collaboration contrasted with service user accounts and care plan reviews. Definitions and understandings of recovery varied, as did views of the role of hospital care in promoting recovery. ‘Personalisation’ was not a familiar term, although there was recognition that care was often provided in an individualised way. Managing risk was a central issue for staff, and service users were aware of measures taken to keep them safe, although their involvement in discussions was less apparent.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that there is positive practice taking place within acute inpatient wards, with evidence of widespread commitment to safe, respectful, compassionate care. Although ideas of recovery were evident, there was some uncertainty about and discrepancy in the relevance of recovery ideals to inpatient care and the ability of people in acute distress to engage in recovery-focused approaches. Despite the fact that staff spoke of efforts to involve them, the majority of service users and carers did not feel that they had been genuinely involved, although they were aware of efforts to keep them safe.

Future work

Future research should investigate approaches that increase contact time with service users and promote personalised, recovery-focused working; introduce shared decision-making in risk assessment and management; and improve service user experiences of care planning and review and the use of recovery-focused tools during inpatient care.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Families' experiences of involvement in care planning in mental health services: an integrative literature review

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Current policy advocates for the participation of family carers in care planning. Caring for a person with a mental illness requires a significant commitment from families to support their relative's recovery. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: The evidence of family involvement in care planning is generally fraught with conflicting experiences related to different requirements between mental health professionals, families and service users. Confidentiality remains contentious at a practice level in terms of information sharing and decision-making. There is a requirement and need for a shared understanding around care planning between families and mental health professionals. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: The provision of written information pertaining to families regarding confidentiality is required at service level. Educational workshops concerning care planning and treatment options should be provided for service users, families and mental health professionals. Further research into effective service-wide strategies that explore with families how their engagement can be positively fostered in mental health services is warranted.

ABSTRACT

Introduction Mental health service policy stipulates that family carers be involved in care planning. Aim To identify families' experiences of care planning involvement in adult mental health services. Method An integrative review where electronic databases and grey literature were searched for papers published between 01 January 2005 and 10 February 2016. Results Fifteen papers met the inclusion criteria. Thematic analysis generated three themes: (1) families' experience of collaboration, (2) families' perceptions of professionals and (3) families' impressions of the care planning process. Collaborative decision-making is not regularly experienced by families with an 'us' and 'them' divide, perpetuated by a lack of communication, confidentiality constraints and a claim of 'insider knowledge' of service users. When involved, families perceive care planning to be uncoordinated and that their lived experiences are not always appreciated. Discussion Families need to be valued, empowered and engaged in care planning and the partnership distance be addressed. Accommodating the views of family, service user and professionals is preferable but not always possible. Our findings suggest that the key element for professionals is to value all 'insider knowledge' where possible. Implications for Practice Services should develop written information on confidentiality for families and facilitate open communication concerning their involvement in care planning.

Recovery-focused care planning and coordination in England and Wales: a cross-national mixed methods comparative case study

BACKGROUND

In the UK, concerns about safety and fragmented community mental health care led to the development of the care programme approach in England and care and treatment planning in Wales. These systems require service users to have a care coordinator, written care plan and regular reviews of their care. Processes are required to be collaborative, recovery-focused and personalised but have rarely been researched. We aimed to obtain the views and experiences of stakeholders involved in community mental health care and identify factors that facilitate or act as barriers to personalised, collaborative, recovery-focused care.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-national comparative study employing a concurrent transformative mixed-methods approach with embedded case studies across six service provider sites in England and Wales. The study included a survey of views on recovery, empowerment and therapeutic relationships in service users (n = 448) and recovery in care coordinators (n = 201); embedded case studies involving interviews with service providers, service users and carers (n = 117) and a review of care plans (n = 33). Quantitative and qualitative data were analysed within and across sites using inferential statistics, correlations and framework method.

RESULTS

Significant differences were found across sites for scores on therapeutic relationships. Variation within sites and participant groups was reported in experiences of care planning and understandings of recovery and personalisation. Care plans were described as administratively burdensome and were rarely consulted. Carers reported varying levels of involvement. Risk assessments were central to clinical concerns but were rarely discussed with service users. Service users valued therapeutic relationships with care coordinators and others, and saw these as central to recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

Administrative elements of care coordination reduce opportunities for recovery-focused and personalised work. There were few common understandings of recovery which may limit shared goals. Conversations on risk appeared to be neglected and assessments kept from service users. A reluctance to engage in dialogue about risk management may work against opportunities for positive risk-taking as part of recovery-focused work. Research to investigate innovative approaches to maximise staff contact time with service users and carers, shared decision-making in risk assessments, and training designed to enable personalised, recovery-focused care coordination is indicated.