Shared decision making in mental health treatment: qualitative findings from stakeholder focus groups

PURPOSE

This article reports on findings from seven stakeholder focus groups conducted in exploring shared decision making (SDM) between provider and consumer in mental health (MH) treatment in public MH.

BASIC PROCEDURES

Seven focus groups were conducted with stakeholders-consumers, family members, prescribers, MH clinicians, and rural providers. Each of the focus groups was recorded digitally, transcribed into text, and analyzed qualitatively for recurring themes.

MAIN FINDINGS

Provider barriers to SDM include history of the medical model, MH crises, lack of system support, and time. Consumer-related barriers included consumer competency, fears, insight, literacy, and trauma from past experiences. Information-exchange issues include consumer passivity, whether consumers could be viewed as experts, and importance of adequate history information. New skills needed to practice SDM included provider's knowledge about alternative treatments, mastery of person-first language, and listening skills; consumer's ability to articulate their expert information; and computer skills for both providers and consumers. Outcomes expected from practice of SDM include greater sharing of power between provider and consumer, greater follow-through with treatment plans, greater self-management on the part of consumers, and improved therapeutic alliances.

PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS

Implementing SDM in public MH will impact consumers and their families, providers, prescribers, and administrators. More SDM trials in public MH are needed to answer some of the many questions that remain.

Participatory Action Research in Public Mental Health and a School of Nursing: Qualitative Findings from an Academic-Community Partnership

An academic-community partnership between a school of nursing (SON) at a public university (the University of Virginia, or UVA) and a public mental health clinic developed around a shared goal of finding an acceptable shared decision making (SDM) intervention targeting medication use by persons with serious mental illness. The planning meetings of the academic-community partnership were recorded and analyzed. Issues under the partnership process included 1) clinic values and priorities, 2) research agenda, 3) ground rules, and 4) communication. Issues under the SDM content included: 1) barriers, 2) information exchange, 3) positive aspects of shared decision making, and 4) technology. Using participatory-action research (PAR), the community clinic was able to raise questions and concerns throughout the process, be actively involved in research activities (such as identifying stakeholders and co-leading focus groups), participate in the reflective activities on the impact of SDM on practice and policy, and feel ownership of the SDM intervention.