Designed to Clash? Reflecting on the Practical, Personal, and Structural Challenges of Collaborative Research in Psychiatry

Towards an informed research agenda for the field of personality disorders by experts with lived and living experience and researchers

BACKGROUND

We describe a collection of themes for a research agenda for personality disorders that was originally formulated for the ESSPD Borderline Congress in 2022.

METHODS

Experts with lived and living experience (EE), researchers and clinicians met virtually, exchanged ideas and discussed research topics for the field of personality disorders. The experts - patients, relatives, significant others - named the topics they thought most relevant for further research in the field. These topics were presented at the ESPPD conference in October 2022.

RESULTS

The five top themes were: 1. Prevention, early detection and intervention, 2. Recovery beyond symptom improvement, 3. Involvement of relatives in treatment, 4. Gender dysphoria, and 5. Stigma.

CONCLUSIONS

In general, the topics reflect current issues and changes in societal values. Overarching aims of research on these topics are the improvement of social participation and integration in society, better dissemination of research, and better information of the general public and political stakeholders.

Defining dignity at the intersection of disability: a scoping review

PURPOSE

This scoping literature review aimed to determine the definition of dignity in relation to disability. It also examined the extent to which inclusive research methods have been used to develop working definitions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted in five electronic databases, using a modified framework by Arksey and O'Malley. Narrative synthesis and qualitative content analysis were employed to examine definitions of dignity and the use of inclusive research methods.

RESULTS

22 peer-reviewed studies were included. The majority of the studies were qualitative (72.72%) and examined various disability populations in diverse settings. Although 19 studies offered a definition of dignity, there was no clear consensus. Dignity was frequently defined from a utilitarian perspective, emphasising affordances and barriers. However, engagement with theoretical constructs was superficial and limited. Further, no studies mentioned the use of inclusive research methods.

CONCLUSIONS

The absence of inclusive research methods hinders the development of a comprehensive definition of dignity that is accepted by and relevant to people with disability. Engaging with both theoretical and empirical perspectives of dignity is crucial to develop a meaningful and inclusive definition, which can inform interventions and policies that enhance dignity for people with disability across diverse settings and contexts.

Roles, outcomes, and enablers within research partnerships: A rapid review of the literature on patient and public involvement and engagement in health research

BACKGROUND

Recent studies mention a need to investigate partnership roles and dynamics within patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in health research, and how impact and outcomes are achieved. Many labels exist to describe involvement processes, but it is unknown whether the label has implications on partnerships and outcomes. This rapid review investigates how roles between patients, relatives and researchers in a broad variety of PPIE activities in health research are described in peer reviewed papers and explores what enables these partnerships.

METHODS

Rapid review of articles published between 2012 and February 2022 describing, evaluating, or reflecting on experiences of PPIE in health research. All research disciplines and research areas were eligible. Four databases (Medline, Embase, PsychInfo and CINAHL) were searched between November 2021 and February 2022. We followed PRISMA guidelines and extracted descriptive factors: year, origin, research area and discipline, study focus, framework used and co-authorship. On a selection of articles, we performed a narrative analysis of partnership roles using Smits et al.'s. Involvement Matrix. Lastly, we performed a meta synthesis of reported enablers and outcomes of the partnerships. Patients and Relatives (PRs) have been involved in the whole rapid review process and are co-authors of this article.

RESULTS

Seventy articles from various research disciplines and areas were included. Forty articles were selected for a narrative analysis of the role description of PRs and researchers, and a meta synthesis of enablers and outcomes. Most articles described researchers as decision-makers throughout the research cycle. PRs most often were partners when they were included as co-authors; they were mostly partners in the design, analysis, write-up, and dissemination stages. Enablers of partnerships included: PR training, personality of PRs and communication skills, trust, remuneration and time.

CONCLUSIONS

Researchers' decision-making roles gives them control of where and when to include PRs in their projects. Co-authorship is a way of acknowledging patients' contributions which may lead to legitimation of their knowledge and the partnership. Authors describe common enablers, which can help future partnership formation.

'Learning and growing together': exploring consumer partnerships in a PhD, an ethnographic study

BACKGROUND

Consumer and community involvement (CCI) in health research is increasingly recognised as best practice and is closely linked with calls for epistemic justice and more transparent university collaborations with consumers. Given doctoral candidates play a key role in the future of co-production, examination of consumer partnerships in PhDs is important. This study aimed to describe and evaluate consumer partnerships in a PhD from the perspective of the consumer co-researchers, the PhD candidate, and the academic supervisors including optimal approaches, impacts, and benefits and challenges.

METHODS

This prospective, co-produced ethnographic study was conducted over 33 months. Data collection included field notes, a monthly online log of partnership experiences and time spent, interviews or a focus group every six months, and a PhD student reflexive diary. Qualitative data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

The student, two academics, and four consumer co-researchers were involved. A mean of 11.10 h per month were spent on CCI. The student spent the most time (mean 15.86 h per month). Preparation for dissemination of findings was the most frequent partnership activity. The two overarching themes emphasised that a PhD promotes a rich partnership ethos with the student at the centre and that the partnership was a worthwhile but challenging process. The four sub-themes highlighted that developing a collegial and supportive environment with regular meetings combined with a multi-faceted and responsive co-learning approach were core to success. Additionally, there were benefits for individuals, research processes and outcomes, and for driving change in consumer-academic research partnerships. Recruiting to and forming the partnership, maintaining the collaboration through inevitable changes and challenges, and an ethical and supportive closure of the research team were critical.

CONCLUSIONS

This longitudinal ethnographic study demonstrated that doctoral research can create a rich ethos for research and knowledge co-production which evolved over time. Equalising power dynamics through relationship building and co-learning was critical. Additionally, a focus on supportively ending the partnership was essential, and CCI may reduce PhD student isolation and procrastination. Enhanced university incentivisation of co-production in health research is recommended to address gaps in consumer remuneration and student support.

[Experience-based items of quality in psychiatric treatment: A first multivariate construct]

In the context of psychiatric care, user-generated measurement instruments may contribute to quality development and assurance. An explorative construct of experience-related quality components was developed in participative-collaborative cooperation that grasps the users' experiences of psychiatric care. After developing the components using a grounded theory methodology, they were quantified, and their interrelations were investigated using a multidimensional scaling method to explore their internal cohesion. The construct makes it possible to separate structural from interpersonal requirements of the quality components. It further indicated which components are more feasible for the home treatment setting, and which ones for an institutional setting. The components and the construct may be perceived as first steps towards the development of user-generated quality indicators; however, further validation steps are necessary.

Demands on Health Information and Clinical Practice Guidelines for Patients from the Perspective of Adults with Mental Illness and Family Members: A Qualitative Study with In-Depth Interviews

(1) Background: "Patient health information" promote health literacy. "Patient guidelines" as a sub group reflect the current evidence about illnesses and treatment options adapted to the needs of laypersons. Little is known about factors promoting and hindering their use by people affected by mental illness and their relatives. (2) Methods: Telephone interviews (N = 15; n = 4 adults affected by mental illness, n = 5 relatives, n = 6 both applicable) were conducted according to the Sørensen model of health literacy. Data were recorded, transcribed and content-analyzed following Mayring. (3) Results: Health information is used regularly by individuals affected by mental illness and their relatives, but "patient guidelines" are largely unknown. Yet, there is a great willingness to use them. Main barriers are a lack of statistical knowledge, the complexity of health-related topics and cognitive impairment sometimes accompanying mental illnesses. Target group-oriented adaptation as well as transparent and even-handed presentation of (dis-)advantages of treatment options can increase trust. (4) Conclusions: Health information and guidelines can help affected persons and relatives to make treatment decisions by conveying unbiased, up-to-date knowledge. Target group-specific adaptations should be made for psychiatric illnesses and features specific to mental illnesses compared to physical illnesses should be included. Clinical practice guidelines must be distributed more widely to increase their impact.

Psychiatrization in mental health care: The emergency department

BACKGROUND

In the light of high incidences of diagnosed mental disorders and the growing utilization of mental healthcare services, a progressing psychiatrization of society has been hypothesized as the underlying dynamic of these developments. Mental healthcare institutions, such as psychiatric hospitals, may play a decisive role in this. However, there is a scarcity of research into how psychiatrization emerges in hospital settings. This paper explores whether the emergency department (ED) can be considered as a site where psychiatrization happens, becomes observable, and which factors in the context of the ED may be its potential drivers.

METHODS

Two cases as encountered in an interdisciplinary ED will be presented in the following in an anonymized way. Although the cases originate from individual consultations, they can be considered as prototypical. The cases were collected and discussed using the method of interactive interviewing. The results will be analyzed against the backdrop of current theoretic concepts of psychiatrization.

FINDINGS

The ED can be seen as an important area of contact between society and psychiatry. Decisions whether to label a certain condition as a "mental disorder" and to therefore initiate psychiatric treatment, or not, can be highly difficult, especially in cases where the (health) concerns are rather moderate, and clearly associated with common life problems. Psychiatrists' decisions may be largely influenced in favor of psychiatrization by a wide array of disciplinary, institutional, interpersonal, personal, cultural, and social factors.

CONCLUSIONS

The ED appears to be a promising field for research into the mechanisms and motives through which psychiatrization may emerge in mental healthcare settings. Psychiatrists in the ED work within a complex sphere of top-down and bottom-up drivers of psychiatrization. Encounters in the ED can be an important step toward adequate support for many individuals, but they also risk becoming the starting point of psychiatrization by interpreting certain problems through the psychiatric gaze, which may induce diagnoses of questionable validity and treatment of little use.

[Not Available]

Participation of patients and relatives in research means that those affected are involved in the research process in a partnership role. Despite the growing importance of participatory approaches and the large number of available concepts, many researchers and patients are faced with the question of how participatory research can be realized and organized in concrete terms. Here we report on our experiences with two different forms of patient participation in research in the context of pediatric health care research at a university hospital: (1) In a project for the development and evaluation of a case management for patients with spinal muscular atrophy, patient representatives have an consultative role. (2) In the patient advisory board, which is to accompany the research activities of the research group at the site continuously and systematically, i.e. in all phases, the participation currently corresponds to a contributory role (involvement) which, in the future, could be moved onto the collaborative stage. In both forms of participation, the essential questions include the selection of the participating patients, the type and extent of participation, and the evaluation of the effect of participation on the research that is carried out. In our experience, both forms of participation add value to research from the perspective of all participants. At the same time, they bring different opportunities and challenges. While in project-based participation the sphere of influence is already delineated by researchers, the context of the patient advisory board provides more room and openness to develop, for example, a research agenda and thus identify new research topics. In our experience, however, sufficient resources (in terms of time and money) are required from all participants, as well as good, trusting cooperation with jointly developed processes to realize both forms of participation.

Different in so many ways: Exploring consumer, health service staff, and academic partnerships in a research advisory group through rapid ethnography

INTRODUCTION

Consumer and community involvement (CCI) encompasses the range of consumer engagement activities across the research cycle. Research advisory groups (RAGs) are a common method of CCI that may empower the consumer voice in research. However, there is limited evaluation of RAGs to guide occupational therapists considering this as a CCI strategy in research. The aim of this study was to explore the processes and outcomes of a RAG partnership for an eDelphi study.

METHODS

Rapid ethnography enabled a rich, thick description of the RAG through triangulation of field notes, a monthly research team log, focus groups, and an individual interview. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Recruitment targeted consumers, health service staff, and academics with experience in CCI to enhance the diversity of perspectives guiding the eDelphi study. The RAG met four times over 4 months.

FINDINGS

Seven diverse RAG members were recruited resulting in a RAG of 12 members, including the research team that included two consumers. Reflexive thematic analysis resulted in an overarching theme: Different in so many ways, which reinforced that authentic CCI in research continues to be rare even for stakeholders with experience in CCI. There were four subthemes: Set up for success, Authentic and capable facilitation, Structures and strategies for genuine partnerships, and A ripple effect of benefits. Findings added to the limited research regarding RAGs and highlighted that a short-term RAG with 12 diverse stakeholders was an effective strategy to foster mutually beneficial and meaningful collaboration. Partnering with two consumer co-researchers in RAG planning, implementation, and evaluation was central to success.

CONCLUSION

Findings demonstrated that with careful co-planning and recruitment, capable facilitation with support of a committed research team (inclusive of consumers), and empowering meeting processes and structures, a short-term RAG resulted in many benefits to participants and enhanced research outcomes.

Needs and Experiences in Psychiatric Treatment (NEPT)- Piloting a Collaboratively Generated, Initial Research Tool to Evaluate Cross-Sectoral Mental Health Services

BACKGROUND

Research tools to evaluate institutions or interventions in the field of mental health have rarely been constructed by researchers with personal experience of using the mental health system ("experiential expertise"). This paper presents a preliminary tool that has been developed within a participatory-collaborative process evaluation as part of a controlled, multi-center, prospective cohort study (PsychCare) to evaluate psychiatric flexible and integrative treatment, FIT for short, models in Germany.

METHOD

The collaborative research team consisting of researchers with and without experiential expertise developed 12 experiential program components of FIT models by an iterative research process based on the Grounded Theory Methodology. These components were transformed into a preliminary research tool that was evaluated by a participatory expert panel, and during a pilot and validation study, the latter using a random sample of 327 users from 14 mental health departments. Internal consistency of the tool was tested using Cronbach's alpha. Construct validity was evaluated using a Principal Components Analysis (PCA) and a Jonckheere Terpstra test in relation to different implementation levels of the FIT model. Concurrent validity was tested against a German version of the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (ZUF-8) using correlation analysis and a linear regression model.

RESULTS

The evaluation of the expert panel reduced 29 initial items to 16 that were further reduced to 11 items during the pilot study, resulting into a research tool (Needs and Experiences in Psychiatric Treatment-NEPT) that demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha of 0.89). PCA yielded a 1-component structure, which accounted for 49% of the total variance supporting the unidimensional structure of the tool. The total NEPT score increased alongside the increasing implementation of the FIT model (p < 0.05). There was evidence (p < 0.001) for convergent validity assessed against the ZUF-8 as criterion measure.

CONCLUSIONS

The NEPT tool seems to be promising for further development to assess the experiences with and fulfillment of needs of psychiatric care models from the perspective of users. This paper demonstrates that it is possible to use a participatory-collaborative approach within the methodologically rigorous confines of a prospective, controlled research design.