Recovery Research Network (RRN)
2016 RRN Emails
January 2016
Recovery Research Network eBULLETIN
January 2016
RRN Meetings
Dr. Steve Gillard and Dr. Vanessa Pinfold have kindly agreed to co-ordinate the next meeting of the RRN, which will take place during April 2016, in London. A provisional theme of recovery and relationships has been suggested. Further information will appear in the ebulletin in due course.
If you would like to present at a future meeting of the RRN please email:
researchintorecovery@kcl.ac.uk
RRN Membership Profile
Updated membership profile attached. If you would like to update your entry please email your text to researchintorecovery@kcl.ac.uk. The Membership Profile will be circulated with each RRN monthly email, but not put on our web-site. New members can now join via the website: https://www.researchintorecovery.com/join
Conferences and Events
i) Open Dialogue UK 2016 Conference – London – 2nd February, 2016.
Our 2016 conference, “Towards openness and democracy in mental health services – Open Dialogue and related approaches in the UK and internationally” will take place on 2nd February 2016 at Friends House in Euston, London. This conference brings together many of the leading developers of Open Dialogue internationally. Keynote speakers will be Jaakko Seikkula, one of the founders of the approach, and Volkmar Aderhold and Petra Hohn, who have been leading the development of the approach in Germany and also in the Parachute Project in NYC. We are delighted to also welcome three key members of the Parachute Project team from New York, as well as members of the Peer supported Open Dialogue project in the UK. As well as addressing the key themes of openness and democracy, the conference will provide a unique opportunity to get an overview of the current state of development relating to Open Dialogue nationally and internationally. There will also be a panel of leading clinicians/experts from a variety of backgrounds in the UK who will be reflecting on the presentations, including Peter Kinderman, Anne Cooke, James Davies, Sami Timimi, Sarah Carr, Jacqui Dillon, Julie Repper and Rachel Waddingham.
We have a range of price points for the conference, in the hope that everyone who wishes to attend will be able to, including group discounts and early bird rates:
• Organisation Rate: £110, £125*
• Organisation Group Rate**: £99, £112.50*
• Independent Practitioner Rate: £75, £85*
• Student/Carer Rate: £30, £35*
• Service User/Benefits Rate: £20, £25*
• * Early Bird (until 30 Nov 2015)
• * Full Rate (from 1 Dec 2015)
• ** Group rates for 5 or more people
Please note: Some free places are also available for those who would like to help us with promoting the event and on the day of the conference. Further details of this can be found on our website.
For further details of the conference and to book places please visit our website by clicking here: http://opendialogueapproach.co.uk/2016-conference/
ii) The 2nd Annual Conference on Peer-supported Open Dialogue (North East London NHS Foundation Trust / Academy of Peer-supported Open Dialogue) is scheduled for 25th of April in central London. For further details and bookings please see:
Tickets are donation based, so people can pay as little as £1 to ensure as many service users and carers, as well as clinicians, can attend.
iii) ISPS have announced their 2016 Residential Conference for Wednesday 7th – Thursday 8th September 2016, at the Peter Chalk Centre, Streatham Campus, University of Exeter.
Therapeutic Relationships: Challenges for Mental Health Services and those who use them.
For further information see:
http://www.ispsuk.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/ISPS-UK-Residential-2016-Conference.pdf
With regard to the above conference, ISPS announce their First Call for Papers. For further information see:
http://www.isps.org/images/Call_for_Papers_FINAL_1.pdf
iii) Making Real Change Happen. The 20th International Congress of the ISPS will take place in the city of Liverpool, UK August 30 – September 3, 2017
Plenary Speakers will include: Alison Brabban, Jacqui Dillon, Grainne Fadden, Jim van Os Other speakers will include: Richard Bentall, Jim Geekie, Peter Kinderman, Eleanor Longden, Brian Martindale, John Read, Rai Waddingham
See more at: http://tinyurl.com/isps-change
Contact: isps@isps.org or visit www.isps2017uk.org
Twitter: #isps2017uk
Papers and Publications
i) Bertram, M. and McDonald, S. (2015) From surviving to thriving: how does that happen. Journal of Mental Health Training, Education and Practice. Vol.10 (5)., pp.337-348.
doi: 10.1108/JMHTEP-06-2015-0027
Background: Community inclusion and the reduction of isolation are central to national mental health policy. However, many service users remain unemployed and socially excluded.
Aims: To explore what helped seven people in contact with secondary mental health services achieve their vocational goals, such as: employment, education, training and volunteering.
Method: co-operative inquiry was used– staff and peer supporters co-designed an evaluation of vocational and peer support interventions with service users.
Results: Service users experienced invalidating living conditions that caused serious distress. These life struggles included: isolation, trauma events and stigma. The impact involved distressing emotions such as: despair, fear, pain and confusion. In contrast, when service users experienced supportive validating conditions (trusting relationships, engaging in valued activity and peer support) they reported being able to learn, change and grow – finding their own way forward, to improve well-being and achieve their vocational goals.
Research implications: Qualitative analysis from in-depth interviews revealed a range of consistent themes that created a foundation to begin developing a model of change – grounded in lived experience. Further research is required to develop this model.
Conclusion: The development of a model of change grounded in an invalidation/validation framework offers a different approach – in terms of how service users are perceived and treated. This has relevance for Government policy development, clinical commissioning groups and practitioners.
The British Journal of Social Work (Volume 45 suppl. 1) published a special issue on Social Work and Recovery in December 2015. Several articles are summarised here, the remainder will be summarised in February’s edition of the RRN ebulletin.
ii) Williams, C.C., Almeida, M. and Knyahnytksa, Y. (2015) Towards a Biopsychosocialpolitical Frame for Recovery in the Context of Mental illness. British Journal of Social Work 45(suppl 1) i9-i26
doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcv100
Background: Internationally, mental health care systems have identified recovery as the underlying philosophy for practice and policy in mental health care, although establishing a specific definition of recovery is still work in progress.
Methods: This mixed-methods study explored the meaning and scope of recovery from the perspective of people diagnosed with mental illnesses. Sixty-five individuals self-identifying as diagnosed with schizophrenia completed measures of recovery, symptom level, insight into illness, hopelessness and internalised stigma. In addition, twenty people participated in a semi-structured interview focused on how diagnosis affected their personal and social experiences.
Results: Regression analyses based on the quantitative data and thematic analysis of the qualitative data indicated stigma is a major barrier to recovery. However, recovery can be promoted by integrated biomedical, psychological, social and political processes. Qualitative findings suggested that an important component of recovery is feeling empowered and entitled to full participation in social environments.
Conclusion: This study suggests that recovery-oriented social work interventions should be directed at promoting social citizenship for people diagnosed with mental illness, combating stigma, and creating the psychological and social environments for finding meaning and hope after receiving a diagnosis.
iii) Khoury, E. and del Barrio, L.R. (2015) Recovery-Oriented Mental Health Practice: A Social Work Perspective. British Journal of Social Work 45(suppl 1) i27-i44
doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcv092
Background: This paper explores the concept of recovery-oriented social work practice in mental health settings as it is understood and practiced by social workers. The authors describe an investigation of the implementation of mental health reforms in Quebec. This study explored the gap between the reforms’ philosophical orientations of mental health recovery and its practical realisation. Specifically, we will discuss the ways in which the social work field encompasses approaches that potentially espouse contradictory understandings of recovery. The study highlights the external and internal obstacles and facilitators to recovery-oriented social work practice.
Methods: This qualitative research project used semi structured interviews with eleven primary care mental health social workers in two health care agencies to better understand how they situate themselves with respect to the recovery orientation.
Findings: The findings illustrate the impact of organisational constraints on social workers’ attempts to practice from a recovery-oriented perspective. Specifically, they show that (i) managerial orientations espoused by the reforms have paradoxically led to systemic barriers to recovery-oriented practice and (ii) recovery practice by social workers is facilitated in part by their understanding of this philosophy and by leadership on the part of their managers. Conclusion: This paper will allow for a better understanding of social work perspectives and practical frustrations regarding current primary care mental health practice.
iv) Davies, K. and Gray, M. (2015) Mental Health Service Users’ Aspirations for Recovery: Examining the Gaps between what Policy Promises and Practice Delivers. British Journal of Social Work 45(suppl 1) i45-i61.
doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcv089
Abstract
This paper draws on findings from an Australian study of mental health service users’ perspectives on service user participation to examine the challenges for translating recovery policy into practice. It considers the ways in which national mental health policies and developing welfare reforms reflect and/or contradict the highly personal mode of recovery important to service users; though they seemingly signal potential wins for service user empowerment, they are accompanied by losses for those who do not fit neatly into clinical categorisations. The service users (n ¼ 11) and service providers (n ¼ 6) interviewed for this exploratory qualitative study revealed that recovery was a lifelong process of fluctuating capacity and described a system poorly equipped and often unwilling to move beyond tokenistic modes of participation. The analysis of service user perspectives against the backdrop of policy reform reveals the ongoing tensions between personal and clinical definitions of recovery.
v) Fox, J., Ramon, S. and Morant, N. (2015) Exploring the Meaning of Recovery for Carers: Implications for Social Work Practice. British Journal of Social Work 45(suppl 1) i117-i134 doi: 10.1093/bjsw/bcv109
Background: This paper describes the development, delivery and evaluation of an intervention undertaken by a social worker focusing on the role of carers in recovery in the UK .It emphasises social work as strengths-based highlighting the experiential wisdom of users and carers at the centre of practice. It discusses the impact that learning about recovery has on mental health carers, exploring the implications of this research for UK social work and beyond.
Methods: A steering group co-produced a training intervention on recovery that was delivered by the first author and a carer, both with experiences of recovery, to eleven carers. Mainly qualitative data, with supplementary socio-demographic data, were collected to evaluate the impact of this training. Thematic analysis was applied to the data.
Results: Findings suggest that being more ‘recovery-aware’ gives carers increased hope and optimism for the future. Awareness of the impact of caring upon the service user’s life helps carers to promote recovery in their relative, and gain confidence in their own expertise-by-caring. Professional care is fundamental to recovery but needs to build on a partnership model. The carers evaluated the training as helpful, and valued its authenticity in being led by trainers with experience of recovery.
Conclusion: This approach, promoted in the intervention, changes the relationships between carers and service users as it enables carers to believe in their relative’s potential to lead an autonomous and independent life, and redefines relationships between carers and professionals. Recognition of carers’ expertise-by-caring demands a new approach to mental health care, with significant implications for British social work practice.
Other News
A call for assistance has been raised by Ann-Mari Lofthus who writes:
I am currently working with a paper about Norwegian ACT service users and recovery, as well as working at SURE, King’s College, under supervision of Professor Diana Rose. In our sub study User Interview User about ACT we used the instrument Questionnaire about Personal Recovery (Sandra Neil at al, 2009). I have done search on the Internet to find other studies using it, but I have no luck. Do you, or any in the Recovery Research Network, know of any other studies using QPR both in the UK and internationally?
Should any of the readership be able to assist Ann-Mari, then please contact her on: Ann-Mari.Lofthus@ahus.no
Shula Ramon and Tony Sparkes co-produce the RRN monthly ebulletin. Please email if there is anything you would like included in the next issue, as we are keen to receive and advertise more news, articles and website references. Information can be posted to either Shula or Tony at the following:
Shula: s.ramon@herts.ac.uk
Of course, material can still be posted to researchintorecovery@kcl.ac.uk
page updated 31 March 2016
February 2016
Recovery Research Network eBULLETIN
February 2016
RRN Meetings
The next RRN meeting is confirmed for Monday the 21st of March 2016, 10:00 – 16:00.
Venue:
Room H2.7 (2nd floor, Hunter Wing)
St George’s University of London
Cranmer Terrace
London SW17 0RE
Theme:
The event will be themed around ‘peer support, relationships and recovery’, ‘critical perspectives on relationships and recovery’, ‘new ideas around relationships and recovery’ and ‘relationships and recovery in practice’.
Directions:
If you haven’t visited the university here before, we are on the same site as St. George’s Hospital (of ’24 Hours in A&E’ fame). The easiest way to find us is from Tooting Broadway underground station on the Northern Line. Turn left as you exit the underground station and take either the 3rd or 4th road on your right – Coverton Rd or Hoyle Rd. As you reach Effort St, you’ll see the Hospital in front of you with Marks and Spencer’s by the main entrance to Grosvenor Wing. As you enter the hospital, head past M&S (on your right), straight through Grosvenor and into Hunter Wing. Here you will find the University Reception (Opposite ‘Peabody’s Café’). Behind the University reception are the lifts. Go to the 2nd Floor and follow signs to room H2.7. If we’re hard to find please ask for Kate on extension 5530 from reception and someone will come and find you. Please do allow time to find us once you arrive at Tooting Broadway
You may find the following link of help:
http://www.sgul.ac.uk/about-us/how-to-get-here
Tickets:
Tickets for the event are free and can be accessed through the following link
https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/recovery-research-network-spring-2016-tickets-21634527454
If you are attending in an un-waged capacity, then for this event we will be able to cover travel expenses but you must bring a receipt with you to claim on the day. We would be grateful if you could let Kate know in advance at kborrett@sgul.ac.uk.
If you would like to present at a future meeting of the RRN please email:
researchintorecovery@kcl.ac.uk
RRN Membership Profile
Updated membership profile attached. If you would like to update your entry please email your text to researchintorecovery@kcl.ac.uk. The Membership Profile will be circulated with each RRN monthly email, but not put on our web-site. New members can now join via the website: https://www.researchintorecovery.com/join
Conferences and Events
i) The 2nd Annual Conference on Peer-supported Open Dialogue (North East London NHS Foundation Trust / Academy of Peer-supported Open Dialogue) is scheduled for 25th of April in central London. For further details and bookings please see:
Tickets are donation based, so people can pay as little as £1 to ensure as many service users and carers, as well as clinicians, can attend.
ii) ISPS have announced their 2016 Residential Conference for Wednesday 7th – Thursday 8th September 2016, at the Peter Chalk Centre, Streatham Campus, University of Exeter.
Therapeutic Relationships: Challenges for Mental Health Services and those who use them.
For further information see:
http://www.ispsuk.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/ISPS-UK-Residential-2016-Conference.pdf
With regard to the above conference, ISPS announce their First Call for Papers. For further information see:
http://www.isps.org/images/Call_for_Papers_FINAL_1.pdf
iii) Making Real Change Happen. The 20th International Congress of the ISPS will take place in the city of Liverpool, UK August 30 – September 3, 2017
Plenary Speakers will include: Alison Brabban, Jacqui Dillon, Grainne Fadden, Jim van Os Other speakers will include: Richard Bentall, Jim Geekie, Peter Kinderman, Eleanor Longden, Brian Martindale, John Read, Rai Waddingham
See more at: http://tinyurl.com/isps-change
Contact: isps@isps.org or visit www.isps2017uk.org
Twitter: #isps2017uk
Papers and Publications
Hyde, B., Bowles, W. and Pawar, M. (2015) ‘We’re still in there’ – consumer voices on mental health inpatient care: social work research highlighting lessons for recovery practice. British Journal of Social Work 45(suppl 1) i62-i78
doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcv093
Summary
This paper reports on research undertaken in an acute inpatient mental health facility in rural Australia to explore the lived experience of inpatient care. Conceptualised within a recovery framework that emphasises the biopsychosocial approach acknowledging consumers’ lived experiences alongside clinical perspectives, this study contributes to addressing a gap in the literature about what consumers experience as being most important to their recovery during an episode of inpatient care. Traditionally, mental health service delivery has been weighted towards clinical recovery with a biomedical approach dominating. This is especially so in an inpatient setting. In this qualitative study, the personal and social components of recovery emerge as critical factors for consumers even in an acute phase of care indicating a need to redress the imbalance. Eight in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with consumers during their stay in the inpatient facility. Drawing on a hermeneutic phenomenological analysis and the use of NVivo, three themes emerged: the importance of listening, facilitating peer support and the inclusion of families. All three themes resonate with core social work practice suggesting social workers have a critical role to play in the transformation of mental health services to reflect the recovery paradigm.
Tew, J., Larsen, J., Hamilton, S., Manthorpe, J., Clewett, N., Pinfold, V. and Szymczynska, P. (2015) ‘And the stuff that I’m able to achieve now is really amazing’: the potential of personal budgets as a mechanism for supporting recovery in mental health. British Journal of Social Work 45(suppl 1) i79-i97
doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcv097
Summary
While there is substantial common ground between the ideas of self-directed support and recovery, there are also significant differences in how these ideas have been implemented in policy and practice. This paper develops an ‘ideal type’ model of how personal budgets may need to be set up for people with mental health difficulties if they are to be effective as a mechanism that can enable recovery. Aspects of this ‘ideal type’ model are then examined in relation to the reported experiences of people accessing personal budgets from a national study of the implementation of personal budgets in mental health in England. In-depth qualitative interviews were undertaken across three local authority areas with fifty-three people with serious mental health difficulties who had accessed personal budgets in 2012–13. Our findings suggest that personal budgets can support recovery thinking and processes, and can be used to mobilise relevant resources to make this possible. Key to achieving this can be co-productive and/or peer-supported processes of assessment and planning. In addition, resource allocation may need to be flexible to take account of fluctuating levels of mental distress, and budgets should be linked to recovery goals rather than assuming long-term care needs.
Brophy, L., Bruxner, A., Wilson, E., Cocks, N. and Stylianou, M. (2015) How social work can contribute in the shift to personalised, recovery-oriented psycho-social disability support services. British Journal of Social Work 45(suppl 1) i98-i116.
doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcv094
Summary
This paper presents the findings from an Australian study in which forty-one people, who self-identified as having a psycho-social disability as a result of mental health problems, spoke about their priorities for treatment, care and support within a personalized funding context. The research enabled an improved understanding of the choices about support that people with psycho-social disabilities would make if offered individualized funding packages. Participants prioritised specific supports to improve their health, financial situation, social connection, housing and personal relationships. A relationship with a support worker with a range of skills was identified as a key facilitator of these life goals, but people with psycho-social disabilities also valued opportunities to have discretionary funds to directly address the major problems they face, including stigma, discrimination and poverty. The paper argues that social workers can potentially fill a range of roles and are well placed to work in partnership with people with psycho-social disabilities. Particularly, they have skills in co production of services, negotiation and advocacy that are required if individual funding is to be maximised for user control, social justice and personal recovery outcomes.
Matsuoka, A. K. (2015) Ethnic/racial minority older adults and recovery: integrating stories of resilience and hope in social work. British Journal of Social Work 45(suppl 1) i135-i152.
doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcv120
Summary
Although a recovery approach is relevant to older adults, a significant gap exists in social work literature regarding mental health recovery among ethnic/racial minority older adults. This paper explores the meaning of ‘recovery’ and the applicability of the Wellness Recovery Action Plan (WRAP), a recovery-based programme, to Japanese-Canadian older adults through qualitative data collected as part of an evaluation of two WRAP workshop series in a metropolitan city in Canada, 2010–12. All eight workshop participants (two male and six female, all Japanese speakers, aged sixty-four to eighty-nine years) took part in the study. A strength-based critical social work approach, which incorporates the understanding of resilience and hope and the intersectionality of oppression, was used to facilitate the programme. Qualitative data analysis identified key themes of the participants’ workshop experiences, including reaffirming self-worth, being positive (hope), being self-reflective and mindful, supporting each other and advocating for themselves. The participants experienced positive changes in line with Jacobson and Greenley’s (2001) internal and external conditions for recovery; in particular, it found an unexpected long-term outcome: the formation of a peer support group by participants. Social work practice in recovery is discussed.
Farrelly, S., Lester, H., Rose, D., Birchwood, M., Marshall, M., Waheed, W., Henderson, C.R., Szmukler, G. and Thornicroft, G. (2015) Barriers to shared decision making in mental health care: qualitative study of the Joint Crisis Plan for psychosis. Health Expectations. [online 27th April 2015]
doi: 10.1111/hex.12368
Summary
Background: Despite increasing calls for shared decision making (SDM), the precise mechanisms for its attainment are unclear. Sharing decisions in mental health care may be especially complex. Fluctuations in service user capacity and significant power differences are particular barriers.
Objective and design: We trialled a form of facilitated SDM that aimed to generate patients’ treatment preferences in advance of a possible relapse. The ‘Joint Crisis Plan’ (JCP) intervention was trialled in four mental health trusts in England between 2008 and 2011. This qualitative study used grounded theory methods to analyse focus group and interview data to understand how stakeholders perceived the intervention and the barriers to SDM in the form of a JCP.
Results: Fifty service users with psychotic disorders and 45 clinicians participated in focus groups or interviews between February 2010 and November 2011. Results suggested four barriers to clinician engagement in the JCP: (i) ambivalence about care planning; (ii) perceptions that they were ‘already doing SDM’; (iii) concerns regarding the clinical ‘appropriateness of service users’ choices’; and (iv) limited ‘availability of service users’ choices’. Service users reported barriers to SDM in routine practice, most of which were addressed by the JCP process. Barriers identified by clinicians led to their lack of constructive engagement in the process, undermining the service users’ experience.
Conclusions: Future work requires interventions targeted at the engagement of clinicians addressing their concerns about SDM. Particular strategies include organizational investment in implementation of service users’ choices and directly training clinicians in SDM communication processes.
MacDonald, D., Barnes, M., Crawford, M., Omeni, E., Wilson, A. and Rose, D. (2015) Service user governors in mental health foundation trusts: accountability or business as usual? Health Expectations. 18(6). 2892-2902.
doi: 10.1111/hex.12274
Summary
Context: National Health Foundation Trusts present opportunities for individual mental health service users to be active in the governance of trusts. This is one of a range of mechanisms for patient and public involvement and one which promotes an individual rather than collective approach to involvement.
Objective: Within the context of a broader study of the impact of service user involvement in mental health services, the objective of this article was to explore the experience of service user governors in foundation trusts and their capacity to hold boards to account.
Design, setting and participants: The Council of Governors in three foundation trusts were observed for a year. Focus groups with service user governors were undertaken in each trust.
Results: Service users had different expectations and understandings of the role and approached it in different ways. Key themes that emerged concerned: the role of a governor, conduct and content of meetings, agenda setting, relationships and representation.
Discussion and conclusions: The experiences of mental health service user governors need to be understood within the complex environment of patient and public involvement in general and of mental health service user involvement in particular. The dislocation of the service user governor role from other forms of service user activity and involvement result in confusion about how notions of holding a trust to account and representation of other service users can be addressed within a boundaried institutional environment.
Tlach, L., Wüsten, C., Daubmann, A., Liebherz, S., Härter, M. and Dirmaier, J. (2015) Information and decision-making needs among people with mental disorders: a systematic review of the literature. Heath Expectations. 18(6) 1856-1872.
doi: 10.1111/hex.12251
Summary
Background: Assessment of users’ information and decision-making needs is one key step in the development of decision-support interventions.
Objective: To identify patients’ information and decision-making needs as a pre-requisite for the development of high-quality web-based patient decision aids (PtDAs) for common mental disorders.
Search strategy: A systematic MEDLINE search for papers published until December 2012 was conducted, and reference lists of included articles and relevant reviews were searched.
Inclusion criteria: Original studies containing data on information or decision-making needs of adults with depression, anxiety disorders, somatoform disorders, alcohol-related disorders and schizophrenia were included.
Data extraction and synthesis: Data extraction was performed using a standardized form, and data synthesis was conducted using a theory-based deductive approach by two independent reviewers. Studies were quality assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.
Main results: Twelve studies were included focusing on information needs or the identification of decisions patients with depression and schizophrenia were facing. No studies were found for the other mental disorders. Overall, seven information needs categories were identified with the topics ‘basic facts’, ‘treatment’ and ‘coping’ being of major relevance. Six decision categories were identified of which decisions on ‘medication’ and ‘treatment setting’ were most often classified.
Conclusions: This review reveals that patients with schizophrenia and depression show extensive information and decision-making needs. The identified needs can initially inform the design of PtDAs for schizophrenia and depression. However, there is an urgent need to investigate information and decision-making needs among patients with other mental disorders.
Goldberg, M., Hadas-Lidor, N. and Karnieli-Miller, O. (2015) From patient to therapatient: social work students coping with mental illness. Qualitative Health Research. 25(7) 997-898.
doi: 10.1177/1049732314553990
Summary
We explored the experiences of social work students with psychiatric difficulties and focused on their challenges as they went through the different stages of development as health care professionals. We interviewed 12 social work students with psychiatric difficulties and analyzed the data using the immersion/crystallization method. The findings reveal the developmental process they underwent from being patients to being “therapatients” (therapists who are also patients; here, therapists coping with psychiatric difficulties). This process included four stages: an initial exploration of the health care world; questioning the possibility of a patient being a therapist and feeling incompetent; identifying their ability to be professionals; and integrating between their patient and therapist parts to become a therapatient. Understanding this process and finding ways to help students through it is crucial to allowing the patient and therapist parts to “live” together and enrich each other, and to allowing integration of professional knowledge and personal experience.
Richards, J., Holttum, S. and Springham, N. (2016) How do “mental health professionals” who are also or have been “mental health service users” construct their identities? Sage Open. [online January 2016).
Summary
Background: Mental health professionals” are increasingly speaking out about their own experiences of using mental health services. However, research suggests that they face identity-related dilemmas because social conventions tend to assume two distinct identities: “professionals” as relatively socially powerful and “patients” as comparatively powerless.
Aims: The aim of this study was, through discourse analysis, to explore how “mental health professionals” with “mental health service user” experience “construct” their identity.
Methods: Discourse analysis views identity as fluid and continually renegotiated in social contexts. Ten participants were interviewed, and the interviews were transcribed and analyzed.
Results: Participants constructed their identity variously, including as separate “professional” and “patient” identities, switching between these in relation to different contexts, suggesting “unintegrated” identities. Participants also demonstrated personally valued “integrated” identities in relation to some professional contexts. Implications for clinical practice and future research are explored. Positive identity discourses that integrate experiences as a service user and a professional included “personhood” and insider “activist,” drawing in turn on discourses of “personal recovery,” “lived experience,” and “use of self.”
Conclusions: These integrated identities can potentially be foregrounded to contribute to realizing the social value of service user and other lived experience in mental health workers, and highlighting positive and hopeful perspectives on mental distress.
doi: 10.1177/2158244015621348
Tierney, E., McEvoy, R., O’Reilly-de Brún, M., de Brún, T., Okonkwo, E., Rooney, M., Dowrick, C., Rogers, A. and MacFarlane, A. (2014) A critical analysis of the implementation of service user involvement in primary care research and health service development using normalization process theory. Health Expectations. [online July 24th 2014].
doi: 10.1111/hex.12237
Summary
Background: There have been recent important advances in conceptualizing and operationalizing involvement in health research and health-care service development. However, problems persist in the field that impact on the scope for meaningful involvement to become a routine – normalized – way of working in primary care. In this review, we focus on current practice to critically interrogate factors known to be relevant for normalization – definition, enrolment, enactment and appraisal.
Method: Ours was a multidisciplinary, interagency team, with community representation. We searched EBSCO host for papers from 2007 to 2011 and engaged in an iterative, reflexive approach to sampling, appraising and analysing the literature following the principles of a critical interpretive synthesis approach and using Normalization Process Theory.
Findings: Twenty-six papers were chosen from 289 papers, as a purposeful sample of work that is reported as service user involvement in the field. Few papers provided a clear working definition of service user involvement. The dominant identified rationale for enrolling service users in primary care projects was linked with policy imperatives for co-governance and emancipatory ideals. The majority of methodologies employed were standard health services research methods that do not qualify as research with service users. This indicates a lack of congruence between the stated aims and methods. Most studies only reported positive outcomes, raising questions about the balance or completeness of the published appraisals.
Conclusion: To improve normalization of meaningful involvement in primary care, it is necessary to encourage explicit reporting of definitions, methodological innovation to enhance co-governance and dissemination of research processes and findings.
Newman Taylor, K., Herbert, L., Woodfine, C. and Shepherd, G. (2014) Are we delivering recovery-based mental health care? An example of ‘co-produced’ service evaluation. Clinical Psychology Forum. 268. 50-54
Summary
This paper describes a co-produced pilot evaluation of secondary care services. The study was designed and run jointly by people with expertise through experience, and expertise though training. The results support the feasibility of co-production in such governance procedures in the NHS, which we suggest should now be expected as routine good practice.
Other News
The School of Health and Social Work at the University of Hertfordshire are offering a MSc Mental Health Recovery and Social Inclusion course. For more information please see the flyer attached to this email:
Shula Ramon and Tony Sparkes co-produce the RRN monthly ebulletin. Please email if there is anything you would like included in the next issue, as we are keen to receive and advertise more news, articles and website references. Information can be posted to either Shula or Tony at the following:
Shula: s.ramon@herts.ac.uk
Of course, material can still be posted to researchintorecovery@kcl.ac.uk
page updated 1 April 2016
March 2016
Recovery Research Network eBULLETIN
March 2016
RRN Meetings
Thank you to St George’s University of London for hosting the Recovery Research Network (RRN) meeting on the 21st of March. Thank you to all who organised the event and thank you to all those individuals and agencies who contributed to the day. The theme for the meeting was based around ‘peer support, relationships and recovery’, ‘critical perspectives on relationships and recovery’, ‘new ideas around relationships and recovery’ and ‘relationships and recovery in practice’.
Contributors to the March event have kindly given permission for their material to be attached to this ebulletin and hosted on the RRN website. Along with presentations from previous events, these are available by following the link on the left-hand side of the RRN home page:
https://www.researchintorecovery.com/rrn
The next meeting of the Recovery Research Network will be held on Wednesday 16th November 2016 at the Sussex Education Centre, Hove, East Sussex. The theme for the meeting will be:
‘Where is the social in clinical and personal recovery?’
Registration is free, details will follow soon.
If you would like to present at a future meeting of the RRN please email either Shula Ramon or Tony Sparkes:
Shula: s.ramon@herts.ac.uk
RRN Membership Profile
Updated membership profile attached. If you would like to update your entry please email your text to researchintorecovery@kcl.ac.uk. The Membership Profile will be circulated with each RRN monthly email, but not put on our web-site. New members can now join via the website: https://www.researchintorecovery.com/join
Conferences and Events
i) The 2nd Annual Conference on Peer-supported Open Dialogue (North East London NHS Foundation Trust / Academy of Peer-supported Open Dialogue) is scheduled for 25th of April in central London. For further details and bookings please see:
Tickets are donation based, so people can pay as little as £1 to ensure as many service users and carers, as well as clinicians, can attend.
ii) May 10th, London. Re-visioning mental health through co-production. Joint conference with Psychosis and Complex Mental Health Faculty of the British Psychological Society. http://www.ispsuk.org/?page_id=48
iii) ISPS have announced their 2016 Residential Conference for Wednesday 7th – Thursday 8th September 2016, at the Peter Chalk Centre, Streatham Campus, University of Exeter.
Therapeutic Relationships: Challenges for Mental Health Services and those who use them.
For further information see:
http://www.ispsuk.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/ISPS-UK-Residential-2016-Conference.pdf
With regard to the above conference, ISPS announce their First Call for Papers. For further information see:
http://www.isps.org/images/Call_for_Papers_FINAL_1.pdf
iv) November 26, London. Fourth ISPS UK annual psychodynamics and psychosis conference: Trauma and psychosis: perspectives on psychodynamics http://www.ispsuk.org/?ai1ec_event=trauma-and-psychosis-perspectives-on-psychodynamics&instance_id=57
v) Making Real Change Happen. The 20th International Congress of the ISPS will take place in the city of Liverpool, UK August 30 – September 3, 2017
Plenary Speakers will include: Alison Brabban, Jacqui Dillon, Grainne Fadden, Jim van Os Other speakers will include: Richard Bentall, Jim Geekie, Peter Kinderman, Eleanor Longden, Brian Martindale, John Read, Rai Waddingham
See more at: http://tinyurl.com/isps-change
Contact: isps@isps.org or visit www.isps2017uk.org
Twitter: #isps2017uk
Papers and Publications
i) Lofthus, A.-M., Westerlund, H., Bjørgen, D., Lindstrøm, J. C., Lauveng, A., Clausen, H., Ruud, T., Heiervang, K. S. (2016). Are Users Satisfied with Assertive Community Treatment in Spite of Personal Restrictions? Community Mental Health Journal, 1-7. Online: http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/26868646
Abstract
The purpose of this explorative study was to examine satisfaction among service users of 12 Norwegian Assertive Community Treatment teams. The study was carried out among a group of 70 service users, and reveals generally high levels of satisfaction with the service, with satisfaction also being high in comparison to other ACT satisfaction studies. Users under a Community Treatment Order were more satisfied, while users with an alcohol use disorder were less satisfied. Younger service users were less positive than older users. There was no difference in satisfaction between the genders. This study’s positive result may reflect the ACT model’s focus on user involvement, recovery and building relationships, and the fact that this service has a more holistic approach than previous services that users have experienced.
ii) Gillard, S. Turner, K. and Neffgen, M. (2015) Understanding recovery in the context of lived experience of personality disorders: a collaborative, qualitative research study. BMC Psychiatry. 15(183) 1-13.
DOI 10.1186/s12888-015-0572-0
Abstract
Background: Concepts of recovery increasingly inform the development and delivery of mental health services internationally. In the UK recent policy advocates the application of recovery concepts to the treatment of personality disorders. However diagnosis and understanding of personality disorders remains contested, challenging any assumption that mainstream recovery thinking can be directly translated into personality disorders services. Methods: In a qualitative interview-based study understandings of recovery were explored in extended, in-depth interviews with six people purposively sampled from a specialist personality disorders’ service in the UK. An interpretive, collaborative approach to research was adopted in which university-, clinical- and service user (consumer) researchers were jointly involved in carrying out interviews and analysing interview data.
Results: Findings suggested that recovery cannot be conceptualised separately from an understanding of the lived experience of personality disorders. This experience was characterised by a complexity of ambiguous, interrelating and conflicting feelings, thoughts and actions as individuals tried to cope with tensions between internally and externally experienced worlds. Our analysis was suggestive of a process of recovering or, for some, discovering a sense of self that can safely coexist in both worlds.
Conclusions: We conclude that key facilitators of recovery – positive personal relationships and wider social interaction – are also where the core vulnerabilities of individuals with lived experience of personaility disorders can lie. There is a role for personality disorders services in providing a safe space in which to develop positive relationships. Through discursive practice within the research team understandings of recovery were co-produced that responded to the lived experience of personality disorders and were of applied relevance to practitioners.
iii) O’Hagan, M. (2015) The alien test: an outside view of human responses to mental distress. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health. 34(4) 151-158.
doi:10.7870/cjcmh-2015-008
Abstract
This commentary imagines what responses to mental distress on Planet Earth might look like to a rational, humane alien from a planet where responses to people with mental distress are compassionate and just. The alien visits Canada and New Zealand and concludes that discrimination skews social and service responses and that the narrow, deficits approach to services does not improve outcomes. Despite this, the alien perceives little sense of urgency for change. The alien then describes the recovery-oriented responses on their own planet and makes recommendations for system change on Planet Earth. The alien points out that deep change in a system with finite resources will require removing the “control” elements of services, closing hospitals, and reducing the dominance of biological psychiatry. The alien emphasizes that it is not sufficient just to build the leadership of people with mental distress, provide a broader range of services for diverse cultures and communities, and promote social inclusion if the failed elements of the old system remain.
Other News
Shula Ramon and Tony Sparkes co-produce the RRN monthly ebulletin. Please email if there is anything you would like included in the next issue, as we are keen to receive and advertise more news, articles and website references. Information can be posted to either Shula or Tony at the following:
Shula: s.ramon@herts.ac.uk
page updated 6 May 2016
April 2016
Recovery Research Network eBULLETIN
April 2016
RRN Meetings
The next meeting of the Recovery Research Network will be held on Wednesday 16th November 2016 at the Sussex Education Centre, Hove, East Sussex. The twin-track theme for the meeting will ask:
‘Are clinical and personal recovery opposed?’
and
‘Where is the social in clinical and personal recovery?’
Registration will be free and further details, including directions, will follow soon.
If you would like to present at a future meeting of the RRN please email either Shula Ramon or Tony Sparkes. Their contact details are:
Shula: s.ramon@herts.ac.uk
RRN Membership Profile
Updated membership profile attached. If you would like to update your entry please email your text to researchintorecovery@kcl.ac.uk. The Membership Profile will be circulated with each RRN monthly email, but not put on our web-site. New members can now join via the website: https://www.researchintorecovery.com/join
Conferences and Events
i) May 10th, London. Re-visioning mental health through co-production. Joint conference with Psychosis and Complex Mental Health Faculty of the British Psychological Society.
Speakers:
Jed Boardman: IMROC: How co-production is core to recovery
Natalie Tobert : Re-visioning Mental Health
Peer support workers: challenges and triumphs
Recovery Colleges: Implementing collaborative change, the journey so far
John Read: Editor of ISPS Journal – Psychosis
More information, including programme from:
http://www.bps.org.uk/events/re-visioning-mental-health-through-co-production
To register:
http://www.kc-jones.co.uk/coproduction
ii) Mental Health Qualitative Research Network (MHQRN) meeting, 25th May 2016, 2pm – 5pm. The McPin Foundation, CAN Mezzanine, 32-36 Loman Street, London, SE1 0EH
The Mental Health Qualitative Research Network (MHQRN) provides an opportunity for people doing qualitative research in the area of mental health to meet and discuss methodological challenges and innovations. The network meets every six months and is convened by Alan Quirk of Royal College of Psychiatrists’ Centre for Quality Improvement, and Sarah Hamilton of The McPin Foundation.
For more information, see the attachment to this edition of the RRN ebulletin
iii) A call for papers entitled: Electronic and Mobile Mental Health in the Psychiatric Rehabilitation Context. Submission Deadline: July 1, 2016
Guest Editors Amir Tal, PhD, Research and Development Director, Shekulo Tov, Israel and John Torous, MD, Departments of Psychiatry and Clinical Informatics, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School will oversee the special issue
More information from:
http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/prj/call-for-papers-electronic-mobile-mental-health.aspx
iv) ISPS have announced their 2016 Residential Conference for Wednesday 7th – Thursday 8th September 2016, at the Peter Chalk Centre, Streatham Campus, University of Exeter.
Therapeutic Relationships: Challenges for Mental Health Services and those who use them.
For further information see:
http://www.ispsuk.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/ISPS-UK-Residential-2016-Conference.pdf
With regard to the above conference, ISPS announce their First Call for Papers. For further information see:
http://www.isps.org/images/Call_for_Papers_FINAL_1.pdf
v) November 26, London. Fourth ISPS UK annual psychodynamics and psychosis conference: Trauma and psychosis: perspectives on psychodynamics http://www.ispsuk.org/?ai1ec_event=trauma-and-psychosis-perspectives-on-psychodynamics&instance_id=57
vi) Making Real Change Happen. The 20th International Congress of the ISPS will take place in the city of Liverpool, UK August 30 – September 3, 2017
Plenary Speakers will include: Alison Brabban, Jacqui Dillon, Grainne Fadden, Jim van Os Other speakers will include: Richard Bentall, Jim Geekie, Peter Kinderman, Eleanor Longden, Brian Martindale, John Read, Rai Waddingham
See more at: http://tinyurl.com/isps-change
Contact: isps@isps.org or visit www.isps2017uk.org
Twitter: #isps2017uk
Papers and Publications
i) Deucher, A. B., Hengartner, M. P., Kawohl W., Konrad, J., Puschner, B., Clarke, E., Slade, M., Vecchio, V. del., Sampogna, G., Égerházi, A., Süveges, Á., Krogsgaard Bording, M., Munk-Jørgensen., P., Rössler, W. and the CEDAR study group (2016) Participation in medical decision-making across Europe: An international longitudinal multicenter study. European Psychiatry. 35. 39-46.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpsy.2016.02.001
Abstract
Background: The purpose of this paper was to examine national differences in the desire to participate in decision-making of people with severe mental illness in six European countries.
Methods: The data was taken from a European longitudinal observational study (CEDAR;
ISRCTN75841675). A sample of 514 patients with severe mental illness from the study centers in Ulm, Germany; London, England; Naples, Italy; Debrecen, Hungary; Aalborg, Denmark; and Zurich, Switzerland; were assessed as to desire to participate in medical decision-making. Associations between desire for participation in decision-making and center location were analyzed with generalized estimating equations.
Results: We found large cross-national differences in patients’ desire to participate in decision-making, with the center explaining 47.2% of total variance in the desire for participation (P < 0.001). Averaged over time and independent of patient characteristics, London (mean = 2.27), Ulm (mean = 2.13) and Zurich (mean = 2.14) showed significantly higher scores in desire for participation, followed by Aalborg (mean = 1.97), where scores were in turn significantly higher than in Debrecen (mean = 1.56). The lowest scores were reported in Naples (mean = 1.14). Over time, the desire for participation in decision-making increased significantly in Zurich (b = 0.23) and decreased in Naples (b = 0.14). In all other centers, values remained stable.
Conclusions: This study demonstrates that patients’ desire for participation in decision making varies by location. We suggest that more research attention be focused on identifying specific cultural and social factors in each country to further explain observed differences across Europe.
ii) Eliacin, J., Salyers, M. P., Kukla, M., and Matthias, M. S. (2015) Patients’ understanding of shared decision-making in a mental health setting: The importance of the patient-provider relationship. Qualitative Health Research. 25(5). 668-78.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1049732314551060
Abstract
Shared decision making is a fundamental component of patient-centered care and has been linked to positive health outcomes. Increasingly, researchers are turning their attention to shared decision making in mental health; however, few studies have explored decision making in these settings from patients’ perspectives. We examined patients’ accounts and understanding of shared decision making. We analyzed interviews from 54 veterans receiving outpatient mental health care at a Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center in the United States. Although patients’ understanding of shared decision making was consistent with accounts published in the literature, participants reported that shared decision making goes well beyond these components. They identified the patient–provider relationship as the bedrock of shared decision making and highlighted several factors that interfere with shared decision making. Our findings highlight the importance of the patient–provider relationship as a fundamental element of shared decision making and point to areas for potential improvement
iii) Stanhope, V., Tondora, J., Davidson, L., Choy-Brown, M. and Marcus, S. C. (2015) Person-centered care planning and service engagement: a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 16(180) 2-11.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25897762
Abstract
Background: Service disengagement is a pervasive challenge the mental health care system faces. Mental health services are of little value should persons with mental illnesses continue to opt out of receiving them. Consumers attribute disengagement from care to an absence of choice in their treatment. In response, the mental health system is adopting a person-centered model, based upon recovery principles, to engage consumers more actively in their care. Person-centered care planning is a promising practice involving collaboration to develop and implement an actionable plan to assist the person in achieving personal recovery goals.
Methods/design: This study design combines a parallel-group randomized controlled trial of community mental health organizations with qualitative methods to assess the effectiveness of person-centered care planning. Participants at 14 sites in Delaware and Connecticut will be randomized to treatment as usual or the person-centered care planning intervention. Participants will be in leadership (n = 70) or supervisory or direct care (n = 210) roles. The person-centered care planning intervention involves intensive staff training and 12 months of ongoing technical assistance. Quantitative survey data will be collected at baseline, 6 months and 12 months measuring person-centered care planning competency and organizational factors. Consumer outcomes (engagement, medication adherence, functioning and consumer satisfaction) will be assessed by Medicaid and state-level data. Qualitative data focused on process factors will include staff and consumer interviews and focus groups. In this intent-to-treat analysis, we will use mixed-effects multivariate regression models to evaluate the differential impact of the person-centered care planning intervention on each consumer and implementation outcome as well as the extent to which clinician assessments of organizational factors are associated with the implementation outcome. Mixed methods will triangulate and strengthen the interpretation of outcomes.
Discussion: The aim of this study is to generate valuable guidance for state systems engaged in scale-up and transformation efforts. Targeted staff selection for training to support sustainability will serve to provide further insight into important intervention implementation strategies. Person-centered care planning has the potential to enhance the impact of all evidence-based and recovery-oriented practices and bring practice into line with the emerging national guidelines in health care reform
Other News
Two opportunities for further study that particularly encourage service users are:
https://www.findaphd.com/search/ProgrammeDetails.aspx?PGID=3086
http://www.herts.ac.uk/courses/mental-health-recovery-and-social-inclusion-online2
Shula Ramon and Tony Sparkes co-produce the RRN monthly ebulletin. Please email if there is anything you would like included in the next issue, as we are keen to receive and advertise more news, articles and website references. Information can be posted to either Shula or Tony at the following:
Shula: s.ramon@herts.ac.uk
page updated 6 May 2016
May 2016
Recovery Research Network eBULLETIN
May 2016
RRN Meetings
The next meeting of the Recovery Research Network will be held on Wednesday 16th November 2016 at the Sussex Education Centre, Hove, East Sussex. The twin-track theme for the meeting will ask:
‘Are clinical and personal recovery opposed?’
and
‘Where is the social in clinical and personal recovery?’
Registration will be free and further details, including directions, will follow soon.
If you would like to present at a future meeting of the RRN please email either Shula Ramon or Tony Sparkes. Their contact details are:
Shula: s.ramon@herts.ac.uk
RRN Membership Profile
Updated membership profile attached. If you would like to update your entry please email your text to researchintorecovery@nottingham.ac.uk. The Membership Profile will be circulated with each RRN monthly email, but not put on our web-site. New members can now join via the website: https://www.researchintorecovery.com/join
Conferences and Events
i) De Montfort University are hosting the international conference on Mental Health and Cultural Diversity: Exploring Transformative Practices and Service Models. 22-24 June 2016. A detailed conference programme is attached with this ebulletin. For more information see:
ii) A call for papers entitled: Electronic and Mobile Mental Health in the Psychiatric Rehabilitation Context. Submission Deadline: July 1, 2016.
Guest Editors Amir Tal, PhD, Research and Development Director, Shekulo Tov, Israel and John Torous, MD, Departments of Psychiatry and Clinical Informatics, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School will oversee the special issue. More information from:
http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/prj/call-for-papers-electronic-mobile-mental-health.aspx
iii) Centre for Co-production in Mental Health Inaugural International Seminar. Middlesex University London. Monday 18th July 2016
‘Insider, Outsider, Impostor?’ Perspectives of mental health service user and survivor researchers and teachers on co-production in academia. Speakers include:
Dr Sarah Gordon (Research Fellow, Department of Psychological Medicine, University of Otago Wellington, New Zealand)
Dr Jayasree Kalathil (Survivor Research)
Dr Dina Poursanidou (Service User Research Enterprise, Institute of Psychiatry, Kings College London)
Dr David Crepaz-Keay (Mental Health Foundation).
Speakers will be joined by colleagues from Middlesex University and partner User-Led Organisations. A programme, with link for registrations is attached.
The seminar is limited to 60 places. There are 40 places available for other paying delegates at £59 each and 20 free places available to service users and survivors who are unwaged, on a low income or from small user-led mental health organisations. All registrations here www.mdx.ac.uk/CCMHIIS
iv) ISPS have announced their 2016 Residential Conference for Wednesday 7th – Thursday 8th September 2016, at the Peter Chalk Centre, Streatham Campus, University of Exeter.
Therapeutic Relationships: Challenges for Mental Health Services and those who use them.
For further information see:
http://www.ispsuk.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/ISPS-UK-Residential-2016-Conference.pdf
With regard to the above conference, ISPS announce their First Call for Papers. For further information see:
http://www.isps.org/images/Call_for_Papers_FINAL_1.pdf
v) November 26, London. Fourth ISPS UK annual psychodynamics and psychosis conference: Trauma and psychosis: perspectives on psychodynamics http://www.ispsuk.org/?ai1ec_event=trauma-and-psychosis-perspectives-on-psychodynamics&instance_id=57
vi) Making Real Change Happen. The 20th International Congress of the ISPS will take place in the city of Liverpool, UK August 30 – September 3, 2017. Plenary Speakers will include: Alison Brabban, Jacqui Dillon, Grainne Fadden, Jim van Os Other speakers will include: Richard Bentall, Jim Geekie, Peter Kinderman, Eleanor Longden, Brian Martindale, John Read, Rai Waddingham
See more at: http://tinyurl.com/isps-change
Contact: isps@isps.org or visit www.isps2017uk.org
Twitter: #isps2017uk
Papers and Publications
i) Schrank, B., Brownell, T., Jakaite, Z., Larkin, C., Pesola, F., Riches, S., Tylee, A. and Slade, M. (2016) Evaluation of a positive psychotherapy group intervention for people with psychosis: pilot randomised controlled trial. Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences 25(3) 235–246.
doi:10.1017/S2045796015000141
Abstract
Aims: Third-wave psychological interventions have gained relevance in mental health service provision but their application to people with psychosis is in its infancy and interventions targeting wellbeing in psychosis are scarce. This study tested the feasibility and preliminary effectiveness of positive psychotherapy adapted for people with psychosis (WELLFOCUS PPT) to improve wellbeing.
Methods: WELLFOCUS PPT was tested as an 11-week group intervention in a convenience sample of people with psychosis in a single centre randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN04199273) involving 94 people with psychosis. Patients were individually randomised in blocks to receive either WELLFOCUS PPT in addition to treatment as usual (TAU), or TAU only. Assessments took place before randomisation and after the therapy. The primary outcome was wellbeing (Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale, WEMWBS). Secondary outcomes included symptoms (Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale), depression (Short Depression-Happiness Scale), self-esteem, empowerment, hope, sense of coherence, savouring beliefs and functioning, as well as two alternative measures of wellbeing (the Positive Psychotherapy Inventory and Quality of Life). Intention-to-treat analysis was performed. This involved calculating crude changes and paired-sample t-tests for all variables, as well as ANCOVA and Complier Average Causal Effect (CACE) Analysis to estimate the main effect of group on all outcomes.
Results: The intervention and trial procedures proved feasible and well accepted. Crude changes between baseline and follow-up showed a significant improvement in the intervention group for wellbeing according to all three concepts assessed (i.e., WEMWBS, Positive Psychotherapy Inventory and Quality of Life), as well as for symptoms, depression, hope, self-esteem and sense of coherence. No significant changes were observed in the control group. ANCOVA showed no main effect on wellbeing according to the primary outcome scale (WEMWBS) but significant effects on symptoms (p = 0.006, ES = 0.42), depression (p = 0.03, ES = 0.38) and wellbeing according to the Positive Psychotherapy Inventory (p = 0.02, ES = 0.30). Secondary analysis adapting for therapy group further improved the results for symptom reduction (p = 0.004, ES = 0.43) and depression (p = 0.03, ES = 0.41) but did not lead to any more outcomes falling below the p = 0.05 significance level. CACE analysis showed a non-significant positive association between the intervention and WEMWBS scores at follow-up (b = 0.21, z = 0.9, p = 0.4).
Conclusions: This study provides initial evidence on the feasibility of WELLFOCUS PPT in people with psychosis, positively affecting symptoms and depression. However, more work is needed to optimise its effectiveness. Future research might evaluate positive psychotherapy as a treatment for comorbid depression in psychosis, and consider alternative measurements of wellbeing.
ii) Riches, S., Schrank, B. and Rashid, T. (2016) WELLFOCUS PPT: Modifying positive psychotherapy for psychosis. Psychotherapy. 53(1) 68-77.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pst0000013
Abstract
Positive psychotherapy (PPT) is an established psychological intervention initially validated with people experiencing symptoms of depression. PPT is a positive psychology intervention, an academic discipline that has developed somewhat separately from psychotherapy and focuses on amplifying well-being rather than ameliorating deficit. The processes targeted in PPT (e.g., strengths, forgiveness, gratitude, savoring) are not emphasized in traditional psychotherapy approaches to psychosis. The goal in modifying PPT is to develop a new clinical approach to helping people experiencing psychosis. An evidence-based theoretical framework was therefore used to modify 14-session standard PPT into a manualized intervention, called WELLFOCUS PPT, which aims to improve well-being for people with psychosis. Informed by a systematic review and qualitative research, modification was undertaken in 4 stages: qualitative study, expert consultation, manualization, and stake-holder review. The resulting WELLFOCUS PPT is a theory-based 11-session manualized group therapy
iii) Tse, S., Tsoi, E WS., Hamilton, B., O’Hagan, M., Shepherd, G., Slade, M., Whitley, R. and Petrakis, M. (2016) Uses of strength-based interventions for people with serious mental illness: A critical review. International Journal of Social Psychiatry. 62(3) 281–291.
doi: 10.1177/0020764015623970
Abstract
Background: For the past 3 decades, mental health practitioners have increasingly adopted aspects and tools of strength-based approaches. Providing strength-based intervention and amplifying strengths relies heavily on effective interpersonal processes.
Aim: This article is a critical review of research regarding the use of strength-based approaches in mental health service settings. The aim is to discuss strength-based interventions within broader research on recovery, focusing on effectiveness and advances in practice where applicable.
Method: A systematic search for peer-reviewed intervention studies published between 2001 and December 2014 yielded 55 articles of potential relevance to the review.
Results: Seven studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. The Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies was used to appraise the quality of the studies. Our review found emerging evidence that the utilisation of a strength-based approach improves outcomes including hospitalisation rates, employment/educational attainment, and intrapersonal outcomes such as self-efficacy and sense of hope.
Conclusion: Recent studies confirm the feasibility of implementing a high-fidelity strength-based approach in clinical settings and its relevance for practitioners in health care. More high-quality studies are needed to further examine the effectiveness of strength-based approaches.
iv) McGregor, J., Brophy, L., Hardy, D., Hoban, D., Meddings, S., Repper, J., Rinaldi, M., Roeg, W., Shepherd, G., Slade, M., Smelson, D., Stergiopoulos, V., on behalf of RCICoP Group (2016). Proceedings of June 2015 Meeting. Recovery Colleges International Community of Practice (RCICoP)
Abstract
Objective: To synthesize findings from an international stakeholder meeting investigating the key features of Recovery Colleges across cultural and service delivery contexts.
Methods: 24 stakeholders from six countries participated in a three day consensus meeting in London, England, comprising researchers, program managers, mental health workers, and individuals with lived and/or professional experience of mental health and addiction challenges. The meeting involved site visits to Recovery Colleges across England, followed by presentations, along with small and large group discussions on key programmatic features of Recovery Colleges. The meeting goals were to share knowledge, identify common and unique practices in diverse settings, expose research gaps, facilitate networking, and develop a collaborative research agenda.
Results: Variations in staffing, funding models, and delivery settings were identified. There was consensus around underlying assumptions and principles, certain key ingredients and implementation challenges. Strategies to facilitate rigorous program development and evaluation were identified, such as the development of a fidelity measure, followed by investigation of the association between fidelity and outcome. Agreed upon research and practice priorities included; formalizations of active program components, clarification of change theories, process and outcome evaluation, investigation of resource consequences, and identifying and addressing access inequities.
Conclusion: Recovery Colleges offer an innovative approach to supporting recovery of individuals, and can contribute to the transformation of health service systems. Existing evaluations of Recovery Colleges are underway, and the identification of consensus on key elements and future research priorities provides a foundation for further investigation.
Presentations
An interesting presentation giving a global overview of recovery developments has been put online by Bill Gye (Schizophrenia Fellowship of NSW, Australia). His email is: billgye@sfnsw.org.au
His talk can be accessed here:
Other News
Shula Ramon and Tony Sparkes co-produce the RRN monthly ebulletin. Please email if there is anything you would like included in the next issue, as we are keen to receive and advertise more news, articles and website references. Information can be posted to either Shula or Tony at the following:
Shula: s.ramon@herts.ac.uk
page updated 9 June 2016
June 2016
Recovery Research Network eBULLETIN
June 2016
RRN Meetings
The next meeting of the Recovery Research Network will be held on Wednesday 16th November 2016 at the Sussex Education Centre, Hove, East Sussex. The twin-track theme for the meeting will ask:
‘Are clinical and personal recovery opposed?’
and
‘Where is the social in clinical and personal recovery?’
Registration will be free and further details, including directions, will follow soon.
If you would like to present at a future meeting of the RRN please email either Shula Ramon or Tony Sparkes. Their contact details are:
Shula: s.ramon@herts.ac.uk
RRN Membership Profile
Updated membership profile attached. If you would like to update your entry please email your text to researchintorecovery@nottingham.ac.uk. The Membership Profile will be circulated with each RRN monthly email, but not put on our web-site. New members can now join via the website: https://www.researchintorecovery.com/join
Conferences and Events
i) A call for papers entitled: Electronic and Mobile Mental Health in the Psychiatric Rehabilitation Context. Submission Deadline: August 1, 2016
Guest Editors Amir Tal, PhD, Research and Development Director, Shekulo Tov, Israel and John Torous, MD, Departments of Psychiatry and Clinical Informatics, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School will oversee the special issue
More information from:
http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/prj/call-for-papers-electronic-mobile-mental-health.aspx
ii) ISPS have announced their 2016 Residential Conference for Wednesday 7th – Thursday 8th September 2016, at the Peter Chalk Centre, Streatham Campus, University of Exeter.
Therapeutic Relationships: Challenges for Mental Health Services and those who use them.
For further information see:
http://www.ispsuk.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/ISPS-UK-Residential-2016-Conference.pdf
With regard to the above conference, ISPS announce their First Call for Papers. For further information see:
http://www.isps.org/images/Call_for_Papers_FINAL_1.pdf
iii) November 26, London. Fourth ISPS UK annual psychodynamics and psychosis conference: Trauma and psychosis: perspectives on psychodynamics http://www.ispsuk.org/?ai1ec_event=trauma-and-psychosis-perspectives-on-psychodynamics&instance_id=57
iv) Making Real Change Happen. The 20th International Congress of the ISPS will take place in the city of Liverpool, UK August 30 – September 3, 2017
Plenary Speakers will include: Alison Brabban, Jacqui Dillon, Grainne Fadden, Jim van Os Other speakers will include: Richard Bentall, Jim Geekie, Peter Kinderman, Eleanor Longden, Brian Martindale, John Read, Rai Waddingham
See more at: http://tinyurl.com/isps-change
Contact: isps@isps.org or visit www.isps2017uk.org
Twitter: #isps2017uk
Papers and Publications
i) McCaffrey, T., and Edwards, J. (2016) “Music therapy helped me get back doing”: Using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis to illuminate the perspectives of music therapy participants in mental health services. Journal of Music Therapy 53(2) 121-148.
doi: 10.1093/jmt/thw002
http://jmt.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2016/02/24/jmt.thw002.abstract
Abstract
Background: Mental health service development internationally is increasingly informed by the collaborative ethos of recovery. Service user evaluation of experiences within music therapy programs allows new phenomena about participation in services to be revealed that might otherwise remain unnoticed.
Objective: The aim of this study was to demonstrate how asking service users about their experience of music therapy can generate useful information, and to reflect upon the feedback elicited from such processes in order to gain a deeper understanding of how music therapy is received among service users in mental health.
Methods: Six mental health service users described their experiences of music therapy in one or two individual interviews. Transcripts of interviews were analyzed using the procedures and techniques of Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis.
Results: Interviews with mental health service users provided rich, in-depth accounts reflecting the complex nature of music therapy participation. Super-ordinate themes refer to the context in which music therapy was offered, the rich sound world of music in music therapy, the humanity of music therapy, and the strengths enhancing opportunities experienced by service users.
Conclusions: Participants indicated that they each experienced music therapy in unique ways. Opinions about the value of music therapy were revealed through an interview process in which the researcher holds an open attitude, welcoming all narrative contributions respectfully. These findings can remind practitioners of the importance of closely tuning into the perspectives and understandings of those who have valuable expertise to share about their experience of music therapy services in mental health.
ii) Marion Freidl, M.D., Francesca Pesola, Psy.D., Jana Konrad, M.D., Bernd Puschner, P.D. Dr. phil., Attila Istvan Kovacs, M.D., Corrado De Rosa, M.D., Andrea Fiorillo, M.D., Malene Krogsgaard Bording, Ph.D., Wolfram Kawohl, M.D., Wulf Rössler, M.D., Marietta Nagy, M.D., Povl Munk-Jørgensen, M.D., Mike Slade, Psy.D. (2016) Effects of Clinical Decision Topic on Patients’ Involvement in and Satisfaction With Decisions and Their Subsequent Implementation. Psychiatric Services 67(6) 658-663.
doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201500083
Abstract
Objective: Clinical decision making is an important aspect of mental health care. Predictors of how patients experience decision making and whether decisions are implemented are under-researched. This study investigated the relationship between decision topic and involvement in the decision, satisfaction with it, and its subsequent implementation from both staff and patient perspectives.
Methods: As part of the Clinical Decision Making and Outcome in Routine Care for People With Severe Mental Illness study, patients (N=588) and their providers (N=213) were recruited from community-based mental health services in six European countries. Both completed bimonthly assessments for one year using the Clinical Decision Making in Routine Care Scale to assess the decision topic and implementation; both also completed the Clinical Decision Making Involvement and Satisfaction Scale.
Results: Three categories of decision topics were determined: treatment (most frequently cited), social, and financial. The topic identified as most important remained stable over the follow-up. Patients were more likely to rate their involvement as active rather than passive for social decisions (odds ratio [OR]=5.7, p,.001) and financial decisions (OR=9.5, p,.001). They were more likely to report higher levels of satisfaction rather than lower levels for social decisions (OR=1.5, p=.01) and financial decisions (OR=1.7, p=.01). Social decisions were more likely to be partly implemented (OR=3.0, p,.001) or fully implemented (OR=1.7, p=.03) than not implemented.
Conclusions: Patients reported poorer involvement, satisfaction, and implementation in regard to treatment-related decisions, compared with social and financial decisions. Clinicians may need to employ different interactional styles for different types of decisions to maximize satisfaction and decision implementation.
iii) MacDonald-Wilson, K.L., Hutchison, S.L., Karpov, I., Wittman, P. and Deegan, P.E. (2016) A Successful Implementation Strategy to Support Adoption of Decision Making in Mental Health Services. Community Mental Health Journal. 1-6. Published online June 2016.
DOI 10.1007/s10597-016-0027-1
Abstract
Individual involvement in treatment decisions with providers, often through the use of decision support aids, improves quality of care. This study investigates an implementation strategy to bring decision support to community mental health centers (CMHC). Fifty-two CMHCs implemented a decision support toolkit supported by a 12-month learning collaborative using the Breakthrough Series model. Participation in learning collaborative activities was high, indicating feasibility of the implementation model. Progress by staff in meeting process aims around utilization of components of the toolkit improved significantly over time (p < .0001). Survey responses by individuals in service corroborate successful implementation. Community-based providers were able to successfully implement decision support in mental health services as evidenced by improved process outcomes and sustained practices over 1 year through the structure of the learning
collaborative model.
Other News
Shula Ramon and Tony Sparkes co-produce the RRN monthly ebulletin. Please email if there is anything you would like included in the next issue, as we are keen to receive and advertise more news, articles and website references. Information can be posted to either Shula or Tony at the following:
Shula: s.ramon@herts.ac.uk
page updated 7 July 2016
July 2016
Recovery Research Network eBULLETIN
July 2016
RRN Meetings
The next meeting of the Recovery Research Network will be held on Wednesday 16th November 2016 at the Sussex Education Centre, Hove, East Sussex. The twin-track theme for the meeting will ask:
‘Are clinical and personal recovery opposed?’
and
‘Where is the social in clinical and personal recovery?’
Registration will be free and further details, including directions, will follow soon.
If you would like to present at a future meeting of the RRN please email either Shula Ramon or Tony Sparkes. Their contact details are:
Shula: s.ramon@herts.ac.uk
RRN Membership Profile
Anyone who has an interest in recovery research can join the RRN, just fill in the online form available at: https://www.researchintorecovery.com/rrn
Please note that if you join the Network, the details you supply will be circulated to other members of the Network as part of the monthly e-bulletin, but will not be put on our website and will not be shared with any other organisation. If you would like to leave the RRN and have your details removed from our database, please email researchintorecovery@nottingham.ac.uk
Conferences and Events
i) A call for papers entitled: Electronic and Mobile Mental Health in the Psychiatric Rehabilitation Context. Submission Deadline: August 1, 2016
Guest Editors Amir Tal, PhD, Research and Development Director, Shekulo Tov, Israel and John Torous, MD, Departments of Psychiatry and Clinical Informatics, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School will oversee the special issue
More information from:
http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/prj/call-for-papers-electronic-mobile-mental-health.aspx
ii) ISPS have announced their 2016 Residential Conference for Wednesday 7th – Thursday 8th September 2016, at the Peter Chalk Centre, Streatham Campus, University of Exeter.
Therapeutic Relationships: Challenges for Mental Health Services and those who use them.
For further information see:
http://www.ispsuk.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/ISPS-UK-Residential-2016-Conference.pdf
With regard to the above conference, ISPS announce their First Call for Papers. For further information see:
http://www.isps.org/images/Call_for_Papers_FINAL_1.pdf
iii) November 26, London. Fourth ISPS UK annual psychodynamics and psychosis conference: Trauma and psychosis: perspectives on psychodynamics http://www.ispsuk.org/?ai1ec_event=trauma-and-psychosis-perspectives-on-psychodynamics&instance_id=57
iv) Making Real Change Happen. The 20th International Congress of the ISPS will take place in the city of Liverpool, UK August 30th – September 3rd, 2017
Plenary Speakers will include: Alison Brabban, Jacqui Dillon, Grainne Fadden, Jim van Os Other speakers will include: Richard Bentall, Jim Geekie, Peter Kinderman, Eleanor Longden, Brian Martindale, John Read, Rai Waddingham
See more at: http://tinyurl.com/isps-change
Contact: isps@isps.org or visit www.isps2017uk.org
Twitter: #isps2017uk
v) Refocus on Recovery 2017 will be held in Nottingham from 18th to 20th September 2017.
The event will comprise expert workshops, an international conference and a Mad Celebration event. Conference themes will be Recovery for different groups, Re-situating mental health, Prevention of mental ill-health, Allocating resources.
See more at: https://www.researchintorecovery.com/ror2017
Papers and Publications
i) Boucher, M., Groleau, D. and Whitley, R. (2016) Recovery and Severe Mental Illness: The Role of Romantic Relationships, Intimacy, and Sexuality. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal.
39(2) 180–182.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/prj0000193
Abstract
Objective: The overall aim of this article is to examine the self-defined role of romantic relationships, intimacy and sexuality in recovery from severe mental illness.
Method: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 35 people with severe mental illness, accompanied by participant observation. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis.
Results: The vast majority of participants considered a supportive relationship that was emotionally or sexually intimate to be a key facilitator and indicator of recovery. However, only a small minority of participants were actually in such a relationship. Participants reported numerous barriers to forming and maintaining such relationships such as financial strain and enduring stigma against people with mental illness.
Conclusion and Implications for Practice: Addressing relational and intimate needs have not been a focus of traditional psychiatric services. As such, some form of “supported dating” within the field of psychosocial rehabilitation may be an essential development to foster an oft-overlooked but important aspect of recovery.
ii) Timander, A,-C., Möller, A., and Davidson, L. (2016) The Negative Effects of Oppression in the Recovery Process. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research. Online: 14 Jul 2016.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15017419.2016.1196241
Abstract
The aim of this project was to study if and how experiences of oppression on the grounds of mental distress and gender affect the reclaiming and (re)construction of identities in the recovery process. In this study 33 narratives were analysed using framework analysis. The analysis showed that the experience of oppression affected the participants negatively along emotional and psychological pathways and affected their life activities, that is, their recovery process was negatively affected. By using a British disability studies perspective on oppression [Thomas, C. 2010. “Medical Sociology and Disability Theory.” In New Directions in the Sociology of Chronic and Disabling Conditions. Assaults on the Lifeworld, edited by G. Scambler, and S Scambler, 37–56. Palgrave Macmillan] the understanding of experiences of mental distress and recovery was argued to be deepened. The process of recovery was in the light of the findings argued to be a highly social and not just an individualistic process, where social factors like experiences of oppression could become a barrier in the recovery process.
Other News
Shula Ramon and Tony Sparkes co-produce the RRN monthly ebulletin. Please email if there is anything you would like included in the next issue, as we are keen to receive and advertise more news, articles and website references. Information can be posted to either Shula or Tony at the following:
Shula: s.ramon@herts.ac.uk
page updated 29 July 2016
August 2016
Recovery Research Network eBULLETIN
August 2016
RRN Meetings
The next meeting of the Recovery Research Network will be held on Wednesday 16th November 2016 at the Sussex Education Centre, Hove, East Sussex. The twin-track theme for the meeting will ask:
‘Are clinical and personal recovery opposed?’
and
‘Where is the social in clinical and personal recovery?’
Registration will be free and further details, including directions, will follow soon.
If you would like to present at a future meeting of the RRN please email either Shula Ramon or Tony Sparkes. Their contact details are:
Shula: s.ramon@herts.ac.uk
RRN Membership Profile
Anyone who has an interest in recovery research can join the RRN, just fill in the online form available at: https://www.researchintorecovery.com/rrn
Please note that if you join the Network, the details you supply will be circulated to other members of the Network as part of the monthly e-bulletin, but will not be put on our website and will not be shared with any other organisation. If you would like to leave the RRN and have your details removed from our database, please email researchintorecovery@nottingham.ac.uk
Conferences and Events
i) ISPS have announced their 2016 Residential Conference for Wednesday 7th – Thursday 8th September 2016, at the Peter Chalk Centre, Streatham Campus, University of Exeter.
Therapeutic Relationships: Challenges for Mental Health Services and those who use them.
For further information see:
http://www.ispsuk.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/ISPS-UK-Residential-2016-Conference.pdf
With regard to the above conference, ISPS announce their First Call for Papers. For further information see:
http://www.isps.org/images/Call_for_Papers_FINAL_1.pdf
ii) November 26th, London. Fourth ISPS UK annual psychodynamics and psychosis conference: Trauma and psychosis: perspectives on psychodynamics http://www.ispsuk.org/?ai1ec_event=trauma-and-psychosis-perspectives-on-psychodynamics&instance_id=57
iii) Making Real Change Happen. The 20th International Congress of the ISPS will take place in the city of Liverpool, UK August 30th – September 3rd, 2017
Plenary Speakers will include: Alison Brabban, Jacqui Dillon, Grainne Fadden, Jim van Os Other speakers will include: Richard Bentall, Jim Geekie, Peter Kinderman, Eleanor Longden, Brian Martindale, John Read, Rai Waddingham
See more at: http://tinyurl.com/isps-change
Contact: isps@isps.org or visit www.isps2017uk.org
Twitter: #isps2017uk
iv) Refocus on Recovery 2017 will be held in Nottingham from 18th to 20th September 2017.
The event will comprise expert workshops, an international conference and a Mad Celebration event. Conference themes will be Recovery for different groups, Re-situating mental health, Prevention of mental ill-health, Allocating resources.
See more at: https://www.researchintorecovery.com/ror2017
Papers and Publications
i) Macpherson, R., Pesola, F., Leamy, M., Bird, V., Le Boutillier, C., Williams, J. and Slade, M. (2016) The relationship between clinical and recovery dimensions of outcome in mental health. Schizophrenia Research. 175(1-3) 142-147.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2015.10.031
Abstract
Background: Little is known about the empirical relationship between clinical and personal recovery.
Aims: To examine whether there are separate constructs of clinical recovery and personal recovery dimensions of outcome, how they change over time and how they can be assessed.
Method: Standardised outcome measures were administered at baseline and one-year follow-up to participants in the REFOCUS Trial (ISRCTN02507940). An exploratory factor analysis was conducted and a confirmatory factor analysis assessed change across time.
Results: We identified three factors: patient-rated personal recovery, patient-rated clinical recovery and staff rated clinical recovery. Only the personal recovery factor improved after one year. HHI, CANSAS-P and HoNOS were the best measures for research and practice.
Conclusions: The identification of three rather than two factors was unexpected. Our findings support the value of concurrently assessing staff and patient perceptions of outcome. Only the personal recovery factor changed over time, this desynchrony between clinical and recovery outcomes providing empirical evidence that clinical recovery and personal recovery are not the same. We did not find evidence of a trade-off between clinical recovery and personal recovery outcomes. Optimal assessment based on our data would involve assessment of hope, social disability and patient-rated unmet need
ii) Hawkes, D., Hingley, D., Wood, S. and Blackhall, A. (2015) Evaluating the VERA framework for communication. Nursing Standard. 30(2) 44-48.
Abstract
This article describes an evaluation of the use of the VERA (validation, emotion, reassurance, activity) framework for communication in a practice development unit at North Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust. Staff of two older-adult inpatient wards in the Crystal Centre received training on the VERA framework and applied it to their practice. They found the VERA framework to be practical and user friendly, and to result in compassionate communication. Staff found that focusing on meaningful, creative interactions with service users and making a connection with these individuals is important.
iii) Carr, S. (2016) Position paper: are mainstream mental health services ready to progress transformative co-production? Bath. National Development Team for Inclusion.
‘This position paper is aimed at everyone with an interest in understanding the challenges for progressing co-production work in mental health services. It is particularly designed for those involved in mental health policy and development as well as service users and practitioners who want to engage with and understand transformative co-production in mental health’ (p3)
iv) Smith, G.P. and Williams T.M. (2016) From providing a service to being of service:
advances in person-centred care in mental health. Current Opinion in Psychiatry. 29(5) 292-297.
DOI:10.1097/YCO.0000000000000264
Abstract
Purpose of review: This review explores the concept of person-centred care, giving particular attention to its application in mental health and its relationship to recovery. It then outlines a framework for understanding the variety of approaches that have been used to operationalize person-centred care, focusing particularly on shared decision-making and self-directed care, two practices that have significant implications for mental health internationally.
Recent findings: Despite growing recognition of person-centred care as an essential component of recovery-orientated practice, the levels of uptake of shared decision-making and self-directed care in mental health remain low. The most significant barrier appears to be the challenge presented to service providers by one of the key principles of person-centred care, namely empowerment.
Summary: Shared decision-making and self-directed support, two practices based upon the principles of person-centred care, have the potential for being effective tools for recovery. Full engagement of clinicians is crucial for their successful uptake into practice. More research is needed to address both outcomes and implementation.
v) Ng, F.Y.Y., Bourke, M.E., and Grenyer, B.F.S. (2016) Recovery from borderline personality disorder: a systematic review of the perspectives of consumers, clinicians, family and carers. Plos One 11(8) e0160515.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0160515
Abstract
Purpose: Longitudinal studies support that symptomatic remission from Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) is common, but recovery from the disorder probably involves a broader set of changes in psychosocial function over and above symptom relief. A systematic review of literature on both symptomatic and personal recovery from BPD was conducted including the views of consumers, clinicians, family and carers.
Materials and Methods: A PRISMA guided systematic search identified research examining the process of recovery from BPD. Longitudinal studies with a follow-up period of five or more years were included to avoid treatment effects.
Results: There were 19 studies, representing 11 unique cohorts (1,122 consumers) meeting the review criteria. There was a limited focus on personal recovery and the views of family and carers were absent from the literature. Rates of remission and recovery differ depending upon individual and methodological differences between studies. Data on symptomatic remission, recurrence and diagnosis retainment suggests that BPD is a stable condition, where symptomatic remission is possible and the likelihood of recurrence following a period of remission is low.
Conclusion: Symptomatic remission from BPD is common. However, recovery including capacities such as engaging in meaningful work was seldom described. Future research needs broader measures of recovery as a sub-syndromal experience, monitoring consumer engagement in meaningful vocation and relationships, with or without the limitations of BPD.
Other News
Shula Ramon and Tony Sparkes co-produce the RRN monthly ebulletin. Please email if there is anything you would like included in the next issue, as we are keen to receive and advertise more news, articles and website references. Information can be posted to either Shula or Tony at the following:
Shula: s.ramon@herts.ac.uk
page updated 21 September 2016
September 2016
Recovery Research Network eBULLETIN
September 2016
RRN Meetings
The next meeting of the Recovery Research Network will be held on Wednesday 16th November 2016 at the Sussex Education Centre, Hove, East Sussex. The twin-track theme for the meeting will ask:
‘Are clinical and personal recovery opposed?’
and
‘What has happened to the social in personal recovery?’
Please follow the following link for further details, registration, and the provisional programme:
https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/recovery-research-network-autumn-2016-tickets-27409496542
If you would like to present at a future meeting of the RRN please email either Shula Ramon or Tony Sparkes. Their contact details are:
Shula: s.ramon@herts.ac.uk
RRN Membership Profile
Anyone who has an interest in recovery research can join the RRN, just fill in the online form available at: https://www.researchintorecovery.com/rrn
Please note that if you join the Network, the details you supply will be circulated to other members of the Network as part of the monthly e-bulletin, but will not be put on our website and will not be shared with any other organisation. If you would like to leave the RRN and have your details removed from our database, please email researchintorecovery@nottingham.ac.uk
Conferences and Events
i) The Mental Health Subcommittee from the European Association of Hospital Managers has issued an invitation to attend their meeting on 13th-14th October 2016. The theme will be on: Sustainability and the future of healthcare Systems. The invitation is circulated with this ebulletin. For further information please see: http://www.eahm-bologna2016.com/
ii) The fourth seminar in the ESRC Seminar Series ‘Re-imagining professionalism in mental health: towards co-production’ has been announced:
Seminar 4: Contemporary developments in mental health policy and commissioning: a help and/or hindrance to co-production and power-sharing
The venue and date will be: University of York, 28 October 2016. For registration details please see:
iii) November 26th 2016. London. Fourth ISPS UK annual psychodynamics and psychosis conference: Trauma and psychosis: perspectives on psychodynamics http://www.ispsuk.org/?ai1ec_event=trauma-and-psychosis-perspectives-on-psychodynamics&instance_id=57
iv) Making Real Change Happen. The 20th International Congress of the ISPS will take place in the city of Liverpool, UK August 30th – September 3rd, 2017
Plenary Speakers will include: Alison Brabban, Jacqui Dillon, Grainne Fadden, Jim van Os Other speakers will include: Richard Bentall, Jim Geekie, Peter Kinderman, Eleanor Longden, Brian Martindale, John Read, Rai Waddingham
See more at: http://tinyurl.com/isps-change
Contact: isps@isps.org or visit www.isps2017uk.org
Twitter: #isps2017uk
v) Refocus on Recovery 2017 will be held in Nottingham from 18th to 20th September 2017.
The event will comprise expert workshops, an international conference and a Mad Celebration event. Conference themes will be Recovery for different groups, Re-situating mental health, Prevention of mental ill-health, Allocating resources.
See more at: https://www.researchintorecovery.com/ror2017
vi) The 12th ENMESH Conference will be held in Groningen, Netherlands from 5th to the 7th October 2017. Conference themes are Assessment: Understanding the context; Epidemiology: Methodological approaches supporting personalised care; Approaches: Novel approaches using the patient’s own context; and Policy: Societal challenges for community mental health. Further information at http://enmesh2017groningen.com/home/
Papers and Publications
i) Tang, L. (2016) Barriers to recovery for Chinese mental health service-users in the UK: a case for community development. Community Development Journal. Advance Access 16th August 2016.
doi:10.1093/cdj/bsw025
http://cdj.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2016/08/16/cdj.bsw025.short?rss=1
Abstract
Community development (CD) has been argued to be important in challenging discrimination and social exclusion faced by mental health service-users. This article focuses on the experience of Chinese mental health service-users in the United Kingdom and discusses what a CD approach might entail for their recovery. Based on a qualitative research, it was found that Chinese users look for self-determination in living arrangements and community participation as well as economic participation. The barriers that hindered the development of these capabilities suggests the problematic of ‘community control’ discourses, the importance for practitioners to understand cultural fluidity and the necessity for a transformative CD approach to tackle the intersecting structural inequalities that limit the life chances of Chinese service-users
ii) Timander, A-C., and Möller, A. (2016). Recovery: experiences of resistance to disablism? Disability & Society [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2016.1230045
Abstract
This article explores whether it is fruitful to use a service user/survivor approach to recovery, by seeing recovery as survival of social invalidation. That is survival of the psychosocial forces that were the source of the experience of mental distress, and as survival of social oppression by the psychiatric services and/or wider society. It could be argued that the participants in this study in the United Kingdom and Sweden recovered, and reclaimed and (re)constructed positive identities. They actively resisted experiences of disablism and rebuilt their lives. By approaching recovery from a service user/survivor perspective, one is focusing on the social, structural and political aspects of the recovery process, and one is resisting biomedical, deviant and reductionist notions of recovery.
Other News
Shula Ramon and Tony Sparkes co-produce the RRN monthly ebulletin. Please email if there is anything you would like included in the next issue, as we are keen to receive and advertise more news, articles and website references. Information can be posted to either Shula or Tony at the following:
Shula: s.ramon@herts.ac.uk
page updated 10 October 2016
October 2016
Recovery Research Network eBULLETIN
October 2016
RRN Meetings
The next meeting of the Recovery Research Network will be held on Wednesday 16th November 2016 at the Sussex Education Centre, Hove, East Sussex. The twin-track theme for the meeting will ask:
‘Are clinical and personal recovery opposed?’
and
‘What has happened to the social in personal recovery?’
Please follow the following link for further details, registration, and the provisional programme.
https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/recovery-research-network-autumn-2016-tickets-27409496542
If you would like to present at a future meeting of the RRN please email either Shula Ramon or Tony Sparkes. Their contact details are:
Shula: s.ramon@herts.ac.uk
RRN Membership Profile
Anyone who has an interest in recovery research can join the RRN, just fill in the online form available at: https://www.researchintorecovery.com/rrn
Please note that if you join the Network, the details you supply will be circulated to other members of the Network as part of the monthly e-bulletin, but will not be put on our website and will not be shared with any other organisation. If you would like to leave the RRN and have your details removed from our database, please email researchintorecovery@nottingham.ac.uk
Conferences and Events
i) November 26th 2016. London. Fourth ISPS UK annual psychodynamics and psychosis conference: Trauma and psychosis: perspectives on psychodynamics http://www.ispsuk.org/?ai1ec_event=trauma-and-psychosis-perspectives-on-psychodynamics&instance_id=57
ii) The McPin Foundation are hosting ‘The McPin Foundation Methods Workshop Series One’ on Wednesday the 30th November 2016, 1:30 – 5pm. The subject will be: Integrating Lived Experience Expertise in Mental Health Research Teams. Please see the event flyer (circulated with this bulletin) for further information. Please note that the flyer advises booking a place by 31st October.
iii) Making Real Change Happen. The 20th International Congress of the ISPS will take place in the city of Liverpool, UK August 30th – September 3rd, 2017
Plenary Speakers will include: Alison Brabban, Jacqui Dillon, Grainne Fadden, Jim van Os Other speakers will include: Richard Bentall, Jim Geekie, Peter Kinderman, Eleanor Longden, Brian Martindale, John Read, Rai Waddingham
See more at: http://tinyurl.com/isps-change
Contact: isps@isps.org or visit www.isps2017uk.org
Twitter: #isps2017uk
iv) Refocus on Recovery 2017 will be held in Nottingham from 18th to 20th September 2017.
The event will comprise expert workshops, an international conference and a Mad Celebration event. Conference themes will be Recovery for different groups, Re-situating mental health, Prevention of mental ill-health, Allocating resources.
See more at: https://www.researchintorecovery.com/ror2017
v) The 12th ENMESH Conference will be held in Groningen, Netherlands from 5th to the 7th October 2017. Conference themes are Assessment: Understanding the context; Epidemiology: Methodological approaches supporting personalised care; Approaches: Novel approaches using the patient’s own context; and Policy: Societal challenges for community mental health. Further information at http://enmesh2017groningen.com/home/
Papers and Publications
i) Leamy, M., Clarke, E., Le Boutillier, C., Bird, V., Choudhury, R., MacPherson, R., Pesola, F., Sabas, K., Williams, J., Williams, P. and Slade, M (2016) Recovery practice in community mental health teams: national survey. The British Journal of Psychiatry. 209(4) 340-346.
doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.114.160739
Abstract
Background: There is consensus about the importance of ‘recovery’ in mental health services, but the link between recovery orientation of mental health teams and personal recovery of individuals has been underresearched.
Aims: To investigate differences in team leader, clinician and service user perspectives of recovery orientation of community adult mental health teams in England.
Method: In six English mental health National Health Service (NHS) trusts, randomly chosen community adult mental health teams were surveyed. A random sample of ten patients, one team leader and a convenience sample of five clinicians were surveyed from each team. All respondents rated the recovery orientation of their team using parallel versions of
the Recovery Self Assessment (RSA). In addition, service users also rated their own personal recovery using the Questionnaire about Processes of Recovery (QPR).
Results: Team leaders (n = 22) rated recovery orientation higher than clinicians (n = 109) or patients (n = 120) (Wald(2) = 7.0, P = 0.03), and both NHS trust and team type influenced RSA ratings. Patient-rated recovery orientation was a predictor of personal recovery (b = 0.58, 95% CI 0.31–0.85, P50.001). Team leaders and clinicians with experience of mental illness (39%) or supporting a family member or friend with mental illness (76%) did not differ in their RSA ratings from other team leaders or clinicians.
Conclusions: Compared with team leaders, frontline clinicians and service users have less positive views on recovery orientation. Increasing recovery orientation may support personal recovery.
ii) Wallace, G., Bird, V., Leamy, M., Bacon, F., Le Boutillier, C., Janosik, M., MacPherson, R., Williams, J. and Slade, M. (2016) Service user experiences of REFOCUS: a process evaluation of a pro-recovery complex intervention. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology 51(9) 1275-1284.
DOI 10.1007/s00127-016-1257-9
Abstract
Purpose: Policy is increasingly focused on implementing a recovery-orientation within mental health services, yet the subjective experience of individuals receiving a pro-recovery intervention is under-studied. The aim of this study was to explore the service user experience of receiving a complex, pro-recovery intervention (REFOCUS), which aimed to encourage the use of recovery-supporting tools and support recovery-promoting relationships.
Methods: Interviews (n = 24) and two focus groups (n = 13) were conducted as part of a process evaluation and included a purposive sample of service users who received the complex, pro-recovery intervention within the REFOCUS randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN02507940). Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data.
Results: Participants reported that the intervention sup- ported the development of an open and collaborative relationship with staff, with new conversations around values, strengths and goals. This was experienced as hope- inspiring and empowering. However, others described how the recovery tools were used without context, meaning participants were unclear of their purpose and did not see their benefit. During the interviews, some individuals struggled to report any new tasks or conversations occur- ring during the intervention.
Conclusion: Recovery-supporting tools can support the development of a recovery-promoting relationship, which can contribute to positive outcomes for individuals. The tools should be used in a collaborative and flexible manner. Information exchanged around values, strengths and goals should be used in care-planning. As some service users struggled to report their experience of the intervention, alternative evaluation approaches need to be considered if the service user experience is to be fully captured.
iii) Stickley, T., Higgins, A., Meade, O., Sitvast, J., Doyle, L., Ellilä, H., Jormfeldt, H., Keogh, B., Lahti, M., Skärsäter, I., Voukila-Oikkonen, P. and Kilkku, N. (2016) From the rhetoric to the real: A critical review of how the concepts of recovery and social inclusion may inform mental health nurse advanced level curricula — The eMenthe project. Nurse Education Today. 37 155-163
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2015.11.015
Summary
Objectives: This critical review addresses the question of how the concepts of recovery and social inclusion may inform mental health nurse education curricula at Master’s level in order to bring about significant and positive change to practice.
Design: This is a literature-based critical review incorporating a rapid review. It has been said that if done well, this approach can be highly relevant to health care studies and social interventions, and has substantial claims to be as rigorous and enlightening as other, more conventional approaches to literature (Rolfe, 2008).
Data Sources: In this review, we have accessed contemporary literature directly related to the concepts of recovery and social inclusion in mental health.
Review Methods: We have firstly surveyed the international literature directly related to the concepts of recovery and social inclusion in mental health and used the concept of emotional intelligence to help consider educational outcomes in terms of the required knowledge, skills and attitudes needed to promote these values-based approaches in practice.
Results: A number of themes have been identified that lend themselves to educational application. International frameworks exist that provide some basis for the developments of recovery and social inclusion approaches in mental health practice, however the review identifies specific areas for future development.
Consultation Requests
There are two consultation requests for October:
i) RRN members are developing a proposal for EU funding for an innovative training network on recovery. This will involve funding for 15 PhD students across Europe, who will undertake research into using lived experience to transform care, service systems and communities. We need to demonstrate that there is support from the recovery research community for this proposal. We would be very grateful if you take a minute to send a short email to Sarah Baily (sarah.baily@nottingham.ac.uk) by Friday 18th November 2016 to tell us (a) if you think this is a good focus (just ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ will suffice!) and (b) your ideas for priority research topics for PhDs in these areas (just a few words for each idea would be ideal)
ii) Peter Bates (Associate at the National Development Team for Inclusion) has put out a request via the RRN ebulletin for suggestions on the following:
I am working in partnership with Health Education England to create an online Guide for involving ‘service users and carers’ in nurse education. Draft webpages are here. Please have a look and send your suggestions for improvement to peter.bates@ndti.org.uk
Other News
Shula Ramon and Tony Sparkes co-produce the RRN monthly ebulletin. Please email if there is anything you would like included in the next issue, as we are keen to receive and advertise more news, articles and website references. Information can be posted to either Shula or Tony at the following:
Shula: s.ramon@herts.ac.uk
page updated 18 November 2016
November 2016
Recovery Research Network eBULLETIN
November 2016
RRN Meetings
Thank you to Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust and the Sussex Education Centre for hosting the Recovery Research Network (RRN) meeting on Wednesday the 16th November. The event was popular, with over 100 people in attendance.
Thank you to all who organised the event (including Ruth Chandler and Kathy Greenwood who chaired the meeting) and to all those individuals and agencies who contributed to the day.
The meeting was based around the two themes of ‘Are clinical and personal recovery opposed?’ and ‘What has happened to the social in personal recovery?’
Contributors to the event have kindly given permission for their material to be uploaded to the Seminar Programme area of the Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust website:
http://www.sussexpartnership.nhs.uk/seminar-programme
|
Seminar programme | Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust Looking for the ‘social’ in clinical and personal recovery. We held the national Recovery Research Network meeting on 16 November with a panel debate on social … |
The presentations are also available, along with presentations from previous events, by following the link on the left-hand side of the RRN home page:
https://www.researchintorecovery.com/rrn
|
Research into Recovery | Recovery Research Network (RRN) What is the Recovery Research Network? The RRN is a network for people who are interested or involved in recovery research to share their plans, present their … |
The date and time of the next meeting of the Recovery Research Network will be advertised in due course.
If you would like to present at a future meeting of the RRN please email either Shula Ramon or Tony Sparkes. Their contact details are:
Shula: s.ramon@herts.ac.uk
RRN Membership Profile
Anyone who has an interest in recovery research can join the RRN, just fill in the online form available at: https://www.researchintorecovery.com/rrn
Please note that if you join the Network, the details you supply will be circulated to other members of the Network as part of the monthly e-bulletin, but will not be put on our website and will not be shared with any other organisation. If you would like to leave the RRN and have your details removed from our database, please email researchintorecovery@nottingham.ac.uk
Conferences and Events
i) Making Real Change Happen. The 20th International Congress of the ISPS will take place in the city of Liverpool, UK August 30th – September 3rd, 2017
Plenary Speakers will include: Alison Brabban, Jacqui Dillon, Grainne Fadden, Jim van Os Other speakers will include: Richard Bentall, Jim Geekie, Peter Kinderman, Eleanor Longden, Brian Martindale, John Read, Rai Waddingham
See more at: http://tinyurl.com/isps-change
Contact: isps@isps.org or visit www.isps2017uk.org
Twitter: #isps2017uk
ii) Registration and abstract submission are now open for Refocus on Recovery 2017, being held in Nottingham from 18th to 20th September 2017. The event will comprise expert workshops, an international conference and a Mad Celebration event. Conference themes will be Recovery for different groups, Re-situating mental health, Prevention of mental ill-health, Allocating resources.
See more at: https://www.researchintorecovery.com/ror2017
iii) The 12th ENMESH Conference will be held in Groningen, Netherlands from 5th to the 7th October 2017. Conference themes are Assessment: Understanding the context; Epidemiology: Methodological approaches supporting personalised care; Approaches: Novel approaches using the patient’s own context; and Policy: Societal challenges for community mental health. Further information at http://enmesh2017groningen.com/home/
Papers and Publications
i) Dalum, H. S., Pedersen, I. K., Cunningham, H. and Eplov, L.F. (2015) From Recovery Programs to Recovery-Oriented Practice? A Qualitative Study of Mental Health Professionals’ Experiences When Facilitating a Recovery-Oriented Rehabilitation Program. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing. 29(6) 419-425.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apnu.2015.06.013
Abstract
Introduction: The recovery model has influenced mental health services and fostered new standards for best practice. However, knowledge about how mental health care professionals (HCPs) experience recovery oriented programs is sparse.
Aim/Question: This paper explores HCPs’ experiences when facilitating a recovery-oriented rehabilitation program. The research question is how do HCPs experience a change in their attitude and practice when applying recovery-oriented programs?
Methods: This paper draws on semi-structured in-depth qualitative interviews conducted with 16 HCPs experienced in facilitating a recovery-oriented rehabilitation program in either the USA or Denmark.
Results: Three themes emerged from the HCPs’ reflections on changes in attitudes and practices: “Hopeful Attitude” captures a change in the HCPs’ attitude toward a more positive view on the future for clients’ living with mental illness; “A New Focus in the Dialogue With Clients” thematizes how the HCPs focus more on the individual’s own goal for recovery rather than disease-induced goals in the dialog with clients; “A Person-Centered Role” comprises a shift in the professional role whereby the HCPs value the client’s own ideas in addition to the professional’s standards.
Conclusion: This study supports the theory of the recovery model by its empirical findings and indications that when facilitating a recovery-oriented program, HCPs experience recovery-oriented changes in their attitude toward life with mental illness, and it alters their professional practice toward a stronger focus on client’s own goals during treatment. More studies are needed to further clarify how changes in HCPs’ attitudes translate into changes in mental health practices.
ii) Jacob, S., Munro, I., Taylor, B. J. and Griffiths, D. (2015) Mental health recovery: A review of the peer-reviewed published literature. Collegian. In press.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.colegn.2015.08.001
Summary
The concept of mental health recovery promotes collaborative partnership among consumers, carers and service providers. However views on mental health recovery are less explored among carers and service providers. The aim of this review was to analyse contemporary literature exploring views of mental health consumers, carers and service providers in relation to their understanding of the meaning of mental health recovery and factors influencing mental health recovery. The literature review questions were: How is mental health recovery and factors influencing mental health recovery viewed by consumers, carers and service providers? What are the differences and similarities in those perceptions? How can the outcomes and recommendations inform the Australian mental health practices? A review of the literature used selected electronic databases and specific search terms and supplemented with manual searching. Twenty-six studies were selected for review which included qualitative, mixed method, and quantitative approaches and a Delphi study. The findings indicated that the concept of mental health recovery is more explored among consumers and is seldom explored among carers and service providers. The studies suggested that recovery from mental illness is a multidimensional process and the concept cannot be defined in rigid terms. In order to achieve the best possible care, the stakeholders require flexible attitudes and openness to embrace the philosophy.
iii) Kidd, J. and Edwards, G. (2016) “Doing it together: a story from the co-production field”, Qualitative Research Journal. 16(3) 274-287.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/QRJ-07-2015-0059
Abstract
Purpose: – Co-production in the context of mental health research has become something of a buzzword to indicate a project where mental health service users and academics are in a research partnership. The notion of partnership where one party has the weight of academic tradition on its side is a contestable one, so in this paper the authors “write to understand” (Richardson and St Pierre, 2005) as the purpose of this paper is to examine the experiences of working in a co-produced research project that investigated supported housing services for people with serious mental health problems.
Design/methodology/approach: – The authors set out to trouble the notion of co-produced research though a painfully honest account of the project, while at the same time recognising it as an idea whose time has come and suggesting a framework to support its implementation.
Findings: – Co-production is a useful, albeit challenging, approach to research.
Originality/value: – This paper is particularly relevant to researchers who are endeavouring to produce work that challenges the status quo through giving voice to people who are frequently silenced by the research process.
Announcements
i) Sarah Yiannoullou from the National Service User Network (NSUN) has given permission for the RRN ebulletin to carry the following link to a short film celebrating 10 years of the NSUN activity. Sarah has kindly provided the following narrative:
It was 10 years ago at the ‘Doing it for ourselves’ conference in Birmingham that the idea of a user led mental health national network was born. Four years later the National Survivor User Network (NSUN) became an Independent Charitable Company.
NSUN is celebrating 10 years of thriving and surviving with the launch of a short film. You can view the film on NSUN’s YouTube channel here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWm_f3lG1v0
ii) Theo Stickley has announced details of a free access mental health e-learning resource. He describes the resource thus:
Following a three year European Union funded project you can have free access (no login required) to Master’s level Mental Health e-learning materials.
There are three themes: Promotion and Prevention, Recovery, Families
These are suitable for teachers, students or members of the public. The site will be live for a minimum of three years.
Discussion
To further promote and develop recovery research, this new section of the ebulletin will present a topic for discussion that has been derived from at least one of the articles summarised that month. Commentary is invited from the RRN readership and we will publish contributions in the following monthly ebulletin. Commentaries can be emailed to either Shula or Tony. This month’s discussion will be grounded upon the following:
Empirical work by Dalum et al (2015) suggests that professional involvement with a recovery-oriented programme was linked with a corresponding shift in professional attitudes and practice. In the second article, Jacob et al (2015) suggest that in comparison to consumers, there is a relative lack of articles exploring recovery involving professionals.
A question arises that asks: Do we have good quality research on professionals’ attitudes to recovery and its relationship to the implementation of recovery within everyday practice? What factors might help or hinder on the way to achieving implementation?
Other News
Shula Ramon and Tony Sparkes co-produce the RRN monthly ebulletin. Please email if there is anything you would like included in the next issue, as we are keen to receive and advertise more news, articles and website references. Information can be posted to either Shula or Tony at the following:
Shula: s.ramon@herts.ac.uk
Tony
page updated 14 December 2016
December 2016
Recovery Research Network eBULLETIN
December 2016
Obituary
It is with a heavy heart that we begin December’s edition of the RRN ebulletin with an obituary to Ruth Chandler who sadly passed away on Tuesday, 6th December 2016. Ruth was a dear friend and colleague who has not only been central to the network since its inaugural meeting back in April 2009, but has been a key figure within the mental health movement more generally.
Ruth’s contribution to the RRN was immeasurable and she was a driving force behind its direction and development. Ruth was a member of the RRN steering group, and played a significant role in most, if not all, of its work. Ruth organised the latest meeting of the network which took place at her base in Brighton. Although she was in hospital at the time, Ruth was very keen for the event to take place, even though she could not attend in person.
In addition to the kind words expressed via the Service User Network (NSUN), http://www.nsun.org.uk/news/mental-health-movement-mourns-ruth-chandler/
Ruth’s colleagues also issued words of love and appreciation. Acknowledging her role as lead Service User and Carer Involvement Coordinator in the Research and Development department they write:
Some of us knew that Ruth was very ill, but she did not want the extent of her illness to be widely known. Even for those of us that were aware, the end came much more suddenly than expected. For those of you who did not know how ill Ruth was, the sense of shock is likely to be much greater.
Two of the department’s senior colleagues share their thoughts about this sad news:
Ruth was an inspirational colleague. I worked with her for 13 years and witnessed the impact she had on others. Her abilities and passion were evident to all. She also stood-up for what she believed in – and encouraged and supported her colleagues within the Lived Experience Advisory Forum to take part in research.
Last Thursday (the day after we heard of Ruth’s death), I was due to teach some Master’s students using materials from one of Ruth’s books, ‘Voicing Caregiver Experiences’. I had no hesitation in continuing to use the material, as I knew that Ruth would have been inspired by the fact that her work was informing the learning of others so soon after the end of her life. I will always remember that teaching session – the sadness I felt as I informed the students of Ruth’s death, but also the sense of purpose that I felt as Ruth’s legacy was operationalised immediately. A fitting tribute to Ruth would be to carry on foregrounding the lived experiences of patients and their caregivers – ensuring that all we do has their interests at heart!
Mark Hayward (Director of Research and Development)
Ruth was an inspirational spokesperson for patient and public involvement in research, and a powerful advocate for the service user and carer voice in the NHS. She was an excellent mentor for new service users and carers taking their first steps in a patient involvement (PPI) role, and built strong and lasting supportive relationships. She worked extremely hard to ensure meaningful consultancy collaboration and coproduction at the highest national level, working with PPI groups and recovery networks around the UK.
Ruth was confident in speaking her mind in consultation with clinical and academic leaders, constantly raising the profile of involvement in research. This was well demonstrated in the recent Approaches to involvement in research/Recovery Research Network event which she organised. She has collaborated and led on some fantastic research projects with nationally commended PPI strategies.
Dr Kathy Greenwood (Clinical Research Fellow, who collaborated on many psychosis and youth mental health research projects with Ruth)
Sara Meddings (Psychology and Psychological Therapies Consultant Lead for Recovery and Wellbeing, Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust) also writes:
Ruth is an inspiration. Her work with LEAF and making lived experience involvement an essential part of all research projects makes me proud to work for Sussex Partnership. She has been a service user leader standing up for people’s rights. She has been a huge supporter of the Recovery College from the start. She has encouraged me to put in research proposals about recovery and lived experience. She has also been a huge support to me especially in my thinking about using my own lived experience. I will miss her. She has been at the forefront of recovery focused research both locally and nationally. I am confident that she has left such an impression that her legacy will live on.
Jean Southey who worked with Ruth in the Service User and Carer Involvement office writes:
We all relied on Ruth to be our figurehead, flying the flag for Involvement in LEAF and the Involvement team. However she also had the wisdom to delegate, ensuring we were constantly building our own skills and confidence by guiding us in the right direction. Ruth rewarded us with her trust in our thinking and beliefs. She was such a role model; assertively speaking her mind to all and encouraging others to do the same, whilst respecting difference. Anyone who got to know Ruth realised she had rare gifts and was able to offer each one of us a wider world of understanding around how the health system works and how we can build a network of voices to become equal partners in research with our experience. Ruth’s political astuteness was immense and yet she could speak in the most available language at so many different levels. Whilst there is no way we individually can replicate Ruth’s charismatic approach we need to be guided by her example; keeping on message, keeping together and keeping all the initiatives alive to move onwards with Ruth’s vision.
I feel privileged to have worked with Ruth for four years. She taught me so much about life and overcoming adversity. I will always remember her cheeky grin, her mischievousness and her great sense of fun. I will really miss her.
Jean Southey, Co-ordinator for Service User and Carer Involvement, Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust
RRN Meetings
Building upon Ruth’s (see above) legacy and having recently come together for what was a most successful gathering on the 11th of November, the next meeting of the RRN will be held on:
Tuesday, April 18th in London
(venue to be confirmed and advertised in due course)
If you would like to present at a future meeting of the RRN please email either Shula Ramon or Tony Sparkes. Their contact details are:
Shula: s.ramon@herts.ac.uk
RRN Membership Profile
Anyone who has an interest in recovery research can join the RRN, just fill in the online form available at: https://www.researchintorecovery.com/rrn
Please note that if you join the Network, the details you supply will be circulated to other members of the Network as part of the monthly e-bulletin, but will not be put on our website and will not be shared with any other organisation. If you would like to leave the RRN and have your details removed from our database, please email researchintorecovery@nottingham.ac.uk
Conferences and Events
i) Making Real Change Happen. The 20th International Congress of the ISPS will take place in the city of Liverpool, UK August 30th – September 3rd, 2017
Plenary Speakers will include: Alison Brabban, Jacqui Dillon, Grainne Fadden, Jim van Os Other speakers will include: Richard Bentall, Jim Geekie, Peter Kinderman, Eleanor Longden, Brian Martindale, John Read, Rai Waddingham
See more at: http://tinyurl.com/isps-change
Contact: isps@isps.org or visit www.isps2017uk.org
Twitter: #isps2017uk
ii) Registration and abstract submission are now open for Refocus on Recovery 2017, being held in Nottingham from 18th to 20th September 2017. The event will comprise expert workshops, an international conference and a Mad Celebration event. Conference themes will be Recovery for different groups, Re-situating mental health, Prevention of mental ill-health, Allocating resources.
See more at: https://www.researchintorecovery.com/ror2017
iii) The 12th ENMESH Conference will be held in Groningen, Netherlands from 5th to the 7th October 2017. Conference themes are Assessment: Understanding the context; Epidemiology: Methodological approaches supporting personalised care; Approaches: Novel approaches using the patient’s own context; and Policy: Societal challenges for community mental health. Further information at http://enmesh2017groningen.com/home/
Papers and Publications
i) Nikčević, N. and Jatta, F. (2015) Evaluation of co-production in mental health (phase 2, five-month follow-up). Mental Health in Co-production project (MHiC)
https://www.rethink.org/media/1543634/Phase%202%20Evaluation%20Report.pdf
See: https://www.rethink.org/about-us/mental-health-in-co-production for further information about The Pilots and Resources
ii) Michelle R. Munson, M.R., Cole, A., Stanhope, V., Marcus, S.C., McKay, M., Jaccard, J. and Ben-David, S. (2016) Cornerstone program for transition-age youth with serious mental illness: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 17:537
DOI 10.1186/s13063-016-1654-0
Abstract
Background: Transition-age youth have elevated rates of mental disorders, and they often do not receive services. This is a serious public health concern, as mental health conditions persist into adulthood. Continuing to engage this population has been a pervasive challenge for the mental health care system worldwide. Few mental health interventions have been developed for transition-age youth, and even fewer have been found to be effective over the transition to adulthood. Cornerstone, a theoretically guided intervention has shown promise for addressing the mental health and psychosocial needs of this population as they emerge into adulthood. Cornerstone provides case management, trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy, mentoring/peer support, community-based in vivo practice, and groups to address stigma, mistrust, and practical skill development to improve the transition to independence among transition-age youth with serious mental health conditions.
Methods/design: This study utilizes a hybrid research design and focuses on examining feasibility, acceptability and preliminary impact, along with factors that influence implementation, to maximize new knowledge. The study combines qualitative methods and a randomized controlled trial, using data to inform and refine protocols and manuals, while testing the preliminary impact of the intervention, compared to best available services (treatment as usual, TAU) at a partnering outpatient mental health clinic (n = 60). Contributors to the intervention development research (n = 20) are national experts on mental health services, clinic administrators and staff and young adults with direct experience. The intervention involves intensive staff training and 18 months of ongoing service provision, monitoring and supervision. Quantitative survey data will be collected at baseline, 3 months, 6 months, and 9 months measuring mental health and practical life outcomes via self-report measures. Medical records will be used to triangulate self-report data (i.e., primary diagnosis, treatment planning and attendance). Qualitative data focuses on the intervention development process and implementation research and will use constant comparison coding techniques. In this intention-to-treat analysis, we will conduct basic omnibus analyses to examine whether Cornerstone leads to improved outcomes relative to TAU utilizing t tests across treatment conditions for each outcome measure specified. We will likewise examine whether changes in the proposed mediating variables differ across groups.
Discussion: The aim of this study is to refine Cornerstone through an intensive preliminary trial, learning through collaboration with clinic staff, project team members, and leaders in New York State and nationwide on how to best serve transition-age youth with serious mental health conditions. Cornerstone has the potential to fill a large gap in the service system for transition-age youth with serious mental health conditions, and may enhance the menu of care options for those who have been recently diagnosed with a serious mental health condition, and yet, have a long life to live. The program is recovery-oriented, builds on the best evidence to date, and is in line with both local and national health care reform efforts.
Announcements
i) Fiona Ng (Associate Research Fellow/PhD Candidate at Northfields Psychology Clinic, University of Wollongong, Australia) writes:
The Journeys to Recovery study looks at the recovery processes involved in Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) through the perspectives of individuals with lived experience. We are interested to hear from individuals who have a diagnosis of BPD about their journey. The voices of individuals with lived experience of BPD have minimally been represented in the research literature. Findings from this study will inform the development of recovery oriented practice guidelines for BPD.
Participation in the Journeys to Recovery study involves completing a confidential and anonymous online survey which asks about quality of life, symptoms, services accessed and views about recovery. The survey takes 30 – 40 minutes to complete. Participants are also invited to take part in a telephone interview, however this is optional.
Please contact Fiona Ng (fionan@uow.edu.au) from the Project Air Strategy, based at the University of Wollongong, Australia (http://www.projectairstrategy.org) for more information and to access the online survey.
Please feel free to share this with your networks
Discussion
Last month we promoted discussion on the topics of:
Empirical work by Dalum et al (2015) suggests that professional involvement with a recovery-oriented programme was linked with a corresponding shift in professional attitudes and practice. In the second article, Jacob et al (2015) suggest that in comparison to consumers, there is a relative lack of articles exploring recovery involving professionals.
A question arises that asks: Do we have good quality research on professionals’ attitudes to recovery and its relationship to the implementation of recovery within everyday practice? What factors might help or hinder on the way to achieving implementation?
|
Mike Slade kindly offered the following response:
A grounded theory study (n=97) in the UK identified that staff experience conflicting system priorities that influence how recovery-oriented practice is implemented (Le Boutillier C et al (2015) Competing priorities: staff perspectives on supporting recovery, Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42, 429-438.). A subsequent systematic review and narrative synthesis of international literature confirmed that organisational priorities influence staff understanding of recovery support, and this influence is leading to the emergence of an additional meaning of recovery, yet the impact of this service-led approach to operationalising recovery-orientated practice has not been evaluated. (Le Boutillier C et al (2015) Staff understanding of recovery-orientated mental health practice: a systematic review and narrative synthesis, Implementation Science, 10, 87.) |
Given the contemporary issues surrounding mental health and young people, this edition of the ebulletin focuses upon the Munson et al. (2016) paper, based on a US pilot, to ask the readership about how they see the viability of a Cornerstone-type project within other contexts?
Other News
Shula Ramon and Tony Sparkes co-produce the RRN monthly ebulletin. Please email if there is anything you would like included in the next issue, as we are keen to receive and advertise more news, articles and website references. Information can be posted to either Shula or Tony at the following:
Shula: s.ramon@herts.ac.uk
page updated 6 January 2017