The Joint Crisis Plan: A Powerful Tool to Promote Mental Health

Utilising co-design to develop a lived experience informed personal safety tool within a mental health community rehabilitation setting

INTRODUCTION

Mental health personal safety tools aim to promote a recovery focus and empower an individualised approach to consumer care. These clinical tools are predominantly utilised in acute mental health settings with a person during or straight after a crisis. There is currently a gap in the literature regarding the preparation of personal safety tools in non-acute mental health settings. This descriptive article discusses the learnings and outcomes from a co-designed project that aimed to develop a personal safety tool suitable for a community mental health rehabilitation setting.

METHODS

Seven people with lived experience engaging within a mental health community-based rehabilitation service were recruited through convenience sampling to participate in the co-design project. A focus group approach was utilised during four group meetings to develop a personal safety tool template. Experiences and ideas about safety planning were transcribed during meetings and thematic analysis extracted key themes. Five steps underpinned the co-design process that included identifying the need, establishing the co-design group, planning, design and development, and review and closure.

CONSUMER AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT

Consumer involvement commenced at step two of the co-design process. The completed personal safety tool was designed with consumer input and review.

FINDINGS

The personal safety tool consisted of nine intervention components. Four key themes emerged from focus group meetings that informed the content of the tool: (i) ensuring the personal safety tool is individualised and meaningful, (ii) promoting exploration of personal strengths and interests, (iii) enabling opportunities to learn self-management skills, and (iv) treating the personal safety tool as a dynamic and adaptable tool.

CONCLUSION

Findings suggest that a personal safety tool targeted to a mental health community-based rehabilitation setting should have an individualised and preventative focus to mental health care. Embedding co-design principles can support opportunities for meaningful consumer engagement and establishing consumer and clinician partnerships.

Implementation of guidelines on Family Involvement for persons with Psychotic disorders: a pragmatic cluster randomized trial. Effect on relatives' outcomes and family interventions received

Background

Family interventions (FI) are recommended as part of the treatment for psychotic disorders, but the implementation in mental health services is generally poor. Recently, The Implementation of guidelines on Family Involvement for persons with Psychotic disorders (IFIP) trial, demonstrated significant improvements in implementation outcomes at cluster-level. This sub-study aims to examine the effectiveness of the IFIP intervention on relatives' outcomes and received FI.

Methods

A cluster randomized controlled trial, was conducted in 15 Norwegian Community Mental Health Center (CMHC) units that were randomized to either the IFIP intervention, including implementation interventions and clinical interventions, or treatment as usual (TAU). The clinical interventions consisted of FI: basic family involvement and support (BFIS) to all patients and family psychoeducation (FPE) to as many as possible. Patients with psychotic disorders and their closest relative were invited to fill in questionnaires at inclusion and 6 months and 12 months follow-up. Received FI was reported by both relatives and clinicians. The relatives' primary outcome was satisfaction with health service support, measured by the Carer well-being and support questionnaire part B (CWS-B). The relatives' secondary outcomes were caregiver experiences, expressed emotions and quality of life. Patients' outcomes will be reported elsewhere.

Results

In total 231 patient/relative pairs from the CMHC units were included (135 intervention; 96 control).The relatives in the intervention arm received an increased level of BFIS (p=.007) and FPE (p < 0.05) compared to the relatives in the control arm, including involvement in crisis planning. The primary outcome for relatives' satisfaction with health service support, showed a non-significant improvement (Cohen's d = 0.22, p = 0.08). Relatives experienced a significant reduced level of patient dependency (Cohen's d = -0.23, p = 0.03).

Conclusion

The increased support from clinicians throughout FI reduced the relatives' perceived level of patient dependency, and may have relieved the experience of responsibility and caregiver burden. The COVID-19 pandemic and the complex and pioneering study design have weakened the effectiveness of the IFIP intervention, underscoring possible potentials for further improvement in relatives' outcomes.

Clinical Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT03869177.

Supported decision-making interventions in mental healthcare: A systematic review of current evidence and implementation barriers

BACKGROUND

There is a growing momentum around the world to foster greater opportunities for the involvement of mental health service users in their care and treatment planning. In-principle support for this aim is widespread across mental healthcare professionals. Yet, progress in mental health services towards this objective has lagged in practice.

OBJECTIVES

We conducted a systematic review of quantitative, qualitative and mixed-method research on interventions to improve opportunities for the involvement of mental healthcare service users in treatment planning, to understand the current research evidence and the barriers to implementation.

METHODS

Seven databases were searched and 5137 articles were screened. Articles were included if they reported on an intervention for adult service users, were published between 2008 and October 2023 and were in English. Evidence in the 140 included articles was synthesised according to the JBI guidance on Mixed Methods Systematic Reviews.

RESULTS

Research in this field remains exploratory in nature, with a wide range of interventions investigated to date but little experimental replication. Overarching barriers to shared and supported decision-making in mental health treatment planning were (1) Organisational (resource limitations, culture barriers, risk management priorities and structure); (2) Process (lack of knowledge, time constraints, health-related concerns, problems completing and using plans); and (3) Relationship barriers (fear and distrust for both service users and clinicians).

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of the barriers identified, recommendations are made to enable the implementation of new policies and programs, the designing of new tools and for clinicians seeking to practice shared and supported decision-making in the healthcare they offer.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

This systematic review has been guided at all stages by a researcher with experience of mental health service use, who does not wish to be identified at this point in time. The findings may inform organisations, researchers and practitioners on implementing supported decision-making, for the greater involvement of people with mental ill health in their healthcare.

Explaining context, mechanism and outcome in adult community mental health crisis care: A realist evidence synthesis

Mental health crises cause significant distress and disruption to the lives of individuals and their families. Community crisis care systems are complex, often hard to navigate and poorly understood. This realist evidence synthesis aimed to explain how, for whom and in what circumstances community mental health crisis services for adults work to resolve crises and is reported according to RAMESES guidelines. Using realist methodology, initial programme theories were identified and then tested through iterative evidence searching across 10 electronic databases, four expert stakeholder consultations and n = 20 individual interviews. 45 relevant records informed the three initial programme theories, and 77 documents, were included in programme theory testing. 39 context, mechanism, outcome configurations were meta-synthesized into three themes: (1) The gateway to urgent support; (2) Values based crisis interventions and (3) Leadership and organizational values. Fragmented cross-agency responses exacerbated staff stress and created barriers to access. Services should focus on evaluating interagency working to improve staff role clarity and ensure boundaries between services are planned for. Organizations experienced as compassionate contributed positively to perceived accessibility but relied on compassionate leadership. Attending to the support needs of staff and the proximity of leaders to the front line of crisis care are key. Designing interventions that are easy to navigate, prioritize shared decision-making and reduce the risk of re-traumatizing people is a priority.

Crisis plans in mental health: A scoping review

Crisis situations are frequent among people with mental health disorders. Several interventions have been developed to act in prevention, including crisis plans recognized as particularly effective in reducing coercive measures. In the literature, several models of crisis plans are proposed with similar aims and contents. Based on the methodology proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute, a scoping review was conducted to map the state of knowledge on crisis plans in adult mental health settings. The literature search conducted on six databases (CINAHL, PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, PsychINFO and Cochrane) yielded 2435 articles. Of these, 122 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, and 78 met the inclusion criteria. Studies were critically appraised using the Joanna Briggs Institute appraisal tools, and data were extracted by two independent reviewers. Content analysis identified a typology of crisis plans: (1) the legal crisis plan and (2) the formal crisis plan. Five modalities were identified for its completion: the sections, the moment, the completion steps, the people involved and the training of key actors. Most identified outcomes are consistent with the main purpose of the intervention, which is crisis prevention. However, the most identified outcomes focused on the service user's recovery and indicated that crisis plans could provide an opportunity to operationalize recovery in mental healthcare, thus suggesting an evolution in the aim of the intervention. Future research should further focus on the modalities of crisis plans to guide the implementation in clinical practice.

Integration of a peer practitioner in a hospital unit for patients with psychotic disorders: an exploratory qualitative study

Introduction

Studies on the integration of peer mental health practitioners (PMHP) in hospitals are sparse, despite significant benefits being reported for patients and professionals. The integration of PMHP requires the consideration of several parameters and a change in the culture of care. This study aims to understand the impact of the integration of a PMHP in a hospital unit caring for patients with psychiatric disorders.

Methods

A qualitative content analysis of three focus groups with the interdisciplinarity team were conducted. A consulting PMHP was integrated into the entire research process.

Results

Data analysis revealed five main themes: the importance of integration, benefits for patients linked to the identification process, benefits for the team and institution, potentials risks, and perspectives.

Discussion

The study was conducted in a hospital setting with patients suffering from severe psychiatric disorders associated with behavioral disturbances. The benefits reported in the results outline the feasibility of PMHP integration in an acute psychiatric care setting. Nevertheless, further formalization of the PMHP role is required to minimize possible areas of tension between respective fields of activity of each professional.

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.

Accelerating the development of a psychological intervention to restore treatment decision-making capacity in patients with schizophrenia-spectrum disorder: a study protocol for a multi-site, assessor-blinded, pilot Umbrella trial (the DEC:IDES trial)

BACKGROUND

A high proportion of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders will at some point in their lives be assessed as not having the capacity to make their own decisions about pharmacological treatment or inpatient care ('capacity'). Few will be helped to regain it before these interventions proceed. This is partly because effective and safe methods to do so are lacking. Our aim is to accelerate their development by testing, for the first time in mental healthcare, the feasibility, acceptability and safety of running an 'Umbrella' trial. This involves running, concurrently and under one multi-site infrastructure, multiple assessor-blind randomised controlled trials, each of which is designed to examine the effect on capacity of improving a single psychological mechanism ('mechanism'). Our primary objectives are to demonstrate feasibility of (i) recruitment and (ii) data retention on the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Treatment (MacCAT-T; planned primary outcome for a future trial) at end-of-treatment. We selected three mechanisms to test: 'self-stigma', low self-esteem and the 'jumping to conclusions' bias. Each is highly prevalent in psychosis, responsive to psychological intervention, and hypothesised to contribute to impaired capacity.

METHODS

Sixty participants with schizophrenia-spectrum diagnoses, impaired capacity and one or more mechanism(s) will be recruited from outpatient and inpatient mental health services in three UK sites (Lothian, Scotland; Lancashire and Pennine; North West England). Those lacking capacity to consent to research could take part if the key criteria were met, including either proxy consent (Scotland) or favourable Consultee advice (England). They will be allocated to one of three randomised controlled trials, depending on which mechanism(s) they have. They will then be randomised to receive, over an 8-week period and in addition to treatment as usual (TAU), 6 sessions of either a psychological intervention which targets the mechanism, or 6 sessions of assessment of the causes of their incapacity (control condition). Participants are assessed at 0 (baseline), 8 (end-of-treatment) and 24 (follow-up) weeks post-randomisation using measures of capacity (MacCAT-T), mechanism, adverse events, psychotic symptoms, subjective recovery, quality of life, service use, anxiety, core schemata and depression. Two nested qualitative studies will be conducted; one to understand participant and clinician experiences and one to investigate the validity of MacCAT-T appreciation ratings.

DISCUSSION

This will be the first Umbrella trial in mental healthcare. It will produce the first 3 single-blind randomised controlled trials of psychological interventions to support treatment decision-making in schizophrenia-spectrum disorder. Demonstrating feasibility will have significant implications not only for those seeking to support capacity in psychosis, but also for those who wish to accelerate the development of psychological interventions for other conditions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04309435 . Pre-registered on 16 March 2020.

Advance Statements for Black African and Caribbean people (AdStAC): protocol for an implementation study

BACKGROUND

The UK government committed to legislating for Advance Choice Documents/Advance Statements (ACD/AS) following their recommendation by the Independent Review of the MHA (2018). ACDs/AS are yet to be implemented in routine practice despite evidence and high demand; they are associated with improved therapeutic relationships and a reduction (25%, RR 0.75, CI 0.61-0.93) in compulsory psychiatric admission. Barriers to their implementation are well documented, ranging from low knowledge levels to logistical challenges in accessing the content during episodes of acute care. In the UK this is an issue for Black people, who experience detention rates disproportionately (over three times) higher than those of White British people and have poorer care experiences and outcomes. ACDs/AS allow for Black people to have their concerns heard by mental health professionals in a care system where they often feel their views are ignored. AdStAC aims to improve Black service users' experiences in mental health services in South London by co-producing and testing an ACD/AS implementation resource with Black service users, mental health professionals and carers/supporters of Black service users.

METHODS/DESIGN

The study will take place in South London, England over three phases: 1) formative work through stakeholder workshops; 2) co-production of resources through a consensus development exercise and working groups; and 3) testing of the resources using quality improvement (QI) methods. A lived experience advisory group, staff advisory group and project steering committee will support the study throughout. The implementation resources will comprise: advance choice document/advance statement (ACD/AS) documentation, stakeholder trainings, a manual for mental health professionals to facilitate the processes of creating and revising advance statements, and informatics development.

DISCUSSION

The implementation resources will help increase the likelihood of the new mental health legislation in England being implemented effectively; through aligning evidence-based medicine, policy and law to effectively provide positive clinical, social and financial outcomes for Black people, the National Health Service (NHS) and wider society. This study will likely benefit a wider group of people with severe mental illness, as when marginalised groups who are least engaged, can be supported with these strategies, then the strategies are likely to work for others.

The Content of Psychiatric Advance Directives: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Psychiatric advance directives (PADs) enable users of mental health services to express their treatment preferences for future mental health crises. PAD completion rates remain low despite high rates of interest among service users and empirically confirmed benefits of their use. A systematic review of service users' preferences regarding the content of PADs could be a valuable resource for clinicians and policy makers and might help reduce barriers to PAD implementation.

METHODS

A systematic review concordant with PRISMA guidelines was conducted. CINAHL, Cochrane, EMBASE, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, PubMed, SCOPUS, and Web of Science databases were searched up to July 2, 2021. Included articles contained original empirical data on service users' preferences regarding the content of PADs or a document analysis of existing PADs. Studies were analyzed thematically, and a narrative synthesis was conducted. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used to assess the methodological quality and risk of bias of the included studies.

RESULTS

The search yielded 4,047 articles, 42 of which were eligible for inclusion. Six themes emerged (most of which included subthemes): signs of crisis, general treatment approach, preferences regarding the treatment setting, treatment preferences, coercion, and social instructions.

CONCLUSIONS

The concern that PADs may be unclear or incompatible with practice standards was not confirmed. Service users generally included clear, comprehensible, and clinically relevant information in their PADs, often providing underlying reasons for their preferences. These reasons were related to previous adverse effects of medication and personal experiences with hospital admissions.

Mental Health Service Users' Perspectives on Psychiatric Advance Directives: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Psychiatric advance directives (PADs) are documents that allow users of mental health services to express their preferences for treatment in future mental health crises. To increase the use of PADs in psychiatric practice, it is helpful to consider how service users view PADs and the factors that facilitate or hinder PAD creation and implementation. A systematic review of the empirical literature on this topic may help inform evidence-based policy making.

METHODS

A systematic review concordant with PRISMA guidelines was conducted. Relevant electronic databases were searched up to July 2, 2021. Articles containing original empirical data on service users' perspectives on PADs were included. Data were analyzed thematically, tabulated, and narratively synthesized.

RESULTS

Fifty-three articles were identified and included. The following categories were identified: general preferences regarding factors such as legal force and revocability; benefits of PADs at the personal, treatment-related, and social levels; challenges and barriers concerning PAD creation and application; and possible and experienced facilitators of PAD creation.

CONCLUSIONS

Users of mental health services are highly interested in PADs and regard them as tools to improve their involvement in care. They generally prefer legally binding PADs that can be revoked only when users are competent to consent. Barriers reported by service users were mainly related to the creation and application of PADs, and support in PAD creation was the most important facilitator identified. The involvement of mental health professionals in creating PADs appears essential to realize the benefits of PADs and to reduce barriers to their use.

Law and psychiatry-current and future perspectives

We describe relevant interfaces between law and psychiatry and current ethical and legal views and changes within the past decades. Ideas of patient autonomy and patients' rights have been major drivers of changes in legal frameworks. We describe developments in the areas of patient information and informed consent, involuntary placement and involuntary treatment, use of coercive measures, forensic psychiatry, digital mental health, data privacy, physician liability, suicide, assisted suicide, euthanasia, end of life decision-making, advance directives, legal and illegal drugs, and delegation and substitution of professional activities. There is no unidirectional pathway between law and ethics. Views, conflicts, and requirements differ between countries and within countries and will need to be balanced according to the societies' changing values also in the future.

Caregiving-related experiences associated with depression severity and its symptomatology among caregivers of individuals with a severe mental disorder: an online cross-sectional study

Caring for a relative with a severe mental disorder puts family caregivers to a great risk of depression. While overall caregiving burden is a strong predictor of depression, the contribution of the various dimensions of burden to caregivers' depression as well as their relationships with depressive symptoms has received little attention. 384 family caregivers completed a cross-sectional online survey including the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression (CES-D) scale, the Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI), and the Brief Experience of Caregiving Inventory (BECI), measuring caregiving burden and experience. We estimated the structure of the relationships between caregiving experiences (i.e., ZBI and BECI subscales) and CES-D symptoms using a network approach. Negative Emotion/Consequences, (lack of) Positive Personal Experience, and Stigma/Effects on Family were the most connected caregiving dimensions to depression. To untangle the role of the Negative Emotion/Consequences component (by far the most central node in estimated networks), a secondary analysis incorporating its composing items was estimated. Losing control over life, feeling strained around the relative and impaired self-perceived health emerged as central nodes. Interestingly, these caregiving-related dimensions or experiences were differentially connected to depressive symptoms. We discuss how these findings might help future research and inform tailored psychoeducational interventions for family caregivers of people with a severe mental disorder.