Dataset Information

Patient empowerment in risk management: a mixed-method study to explore mental health professionals' perspective.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In the last years, patients' empowerment has been increasingly recognized as a crucial dimension of patient-centered healthcare and patient safety. Nevertheless, little work has been done so far in the field of patient safety to investigate strategies for empowering psychiatric patients. Therefore, the aim of this study was to identify, by using focus groups, whether and how psychiatric patients' empowerment can improve risk management according to the perspective of healthcare providers (HPs).

Methods

A mixed-method approach composed of a qualitative data collection method (i.e., focus groups) and a quantitative analysis technique (i.e., inductive content analysis) was applied. HPs working in mental health settings shared their perspectives on psychiatric patients' empowerment in risk management. After the transcription of the audio-taped discussions and the subsequent development of a hierarchical four-level coding system (strategy versus critical issue, thematic area, category, subcategory), two independent raters codified the transcripts and synthesized the content. Absolute frequencies are reported for quantitative data.

Results

Twelve focus groups consisting of six to ten participants, each with an overall sample size of 95 participants (65 women; average age?±?SD 47?±?9?yrs), were enrolled. A total of 1252 participants' verbal contributions (i.e., units of analysis) were assessed. Strategies and critical issues (Level 1) were mentioned almost equally (52 and 48%, respectively) by the HPs. Most of the contributions at Level 2 referred to the thematic areas Treatment and Cure (69%) and Emergency Management (21%). In the area Treatment and Cure, the category Therapeutic Compliance (Level 3) was discussed in one third of all contributions.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that HPs consider patients as crucial partners in risk management and expect them to play a key role in actively enhancing safety. Policy makers should be aware that risk management in mental health settings particularly relies on the therapeutic relationship between HPs and patients. Therefore, allocating sufficient human and financial resources to mental health care aiming to further support the relationship between patients and HPs is of utmost importance.

SUBMITTER: Rimondini M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6567542 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Patient empowerment in risk management: a mixed-method study to explore mental health professionals' perspective.

Rimondini M M Busch I M IM Mazzi M A MA Donisi V V Poli A A Bovolenta E E Moretti F F

BMC health services research 20190613 1

<h4>Background</h4>In the last years, patients' empowerment has been increasingly recognized as a crucial dimension of patient-centered healthcare and patient safety. Nevertheless, little work has been done so far in the field of patient safety to investigate strategies for empowering psychiatric patients. Therefore, the aim of this study was to identify, by using focus groups, whether and how psychiatric patients' empowerment can improve risk management according to the perspective of healthcar ...[more]

PMID: 31196085

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe frontline health workers are the key players in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic, however, several incidences of attacks, stigmatization, and discrimination towards them have been reported throughout the world during the peak of infection. The social impact experienced by health professionals can alter their efficiency and also lead to mental distress. This study aimed to examine the extent of social impact experienced by health professionals currently working in Gandaki Province, Nepal along with the factors associated with their depression status.MethodsThis was a mixed-method study where a cross-sectional online survey was executed among 418 health professionals followed by in-depth interviews with 14 health professionals of Gandaki Province. The bivariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression were performed to identify the factors associated with depression at 5% level of significance. The information collected from the in-depth interviews was clustered into themes by the researchers.ResultsOut of 418 health professionals, 304 (72.7%) expressed that COVID-19 has impacted their family relationships, whereas 293 (70.1%) expressed that it impacted their relationships with friends and relatives, and 282 (68.1%) expressed it impacted their relationships with community people. The prevalence of depression among health professionals was noted at 39.0%. Being a female (aOR:1.425,95% CI:1.220-2.410), job dissatisfaction (aOR:1.826, 95% CI:1.105-3.016), COVID-19 impact on family relation (aOR:2.080, 95% CI:1.081-4.002), COVID-19 impact on relationship with friends and relatives (aOR:3.765, 95% CI:1.989-7.177), being badly treated (aOR:2.169, 95% CI:1.303-3.610) and experiencing moderate (aOR:1.655, 95% CI:1.036-2.645) and severe fear (aOR:2.395, 95% CI:1.116-5.137) of COVID-19 were found to the independent predictors of depression. It was noted that the pandemic has an effect on the social relations of health professionals in multiple ways.ConclusionThis study noted that there is a significant impact of COVID-19 on health professionals in terms of their social and mental health aspects. The social impact experienced by health professionals is an important predictor of their mental health. The mental health and well-being of these vital workforces can be enhanced by focusing on the social aspect during the pandemic.

Project description:BackgroundAnxiety and depression are common among older adults and can intensify during perioperative periods, but few mental health interventions are designed for older surgical patients' unique needs. We developed and adapted a perioperative mental health (PMH) bundle for older patients comprised of behavioral activation (BA) and medication optimization (MO) to ameliorate anxiety and depressive symptoms before, during, and after cardiac, orthopedic, and oncologic surgery.MethodsWe used mixed-methods including workshop studios with patients, caregivers, clinicians, researchers, and interventionists; intervention refinement and reflection meetings; patient case review meetings; intervention session audio-recordings and documentation forms; and patient and caregiver semi-structured interviews. We used the results to refine our PMH bundle. We used multiple analytical approaches to report the nature of adaptations, including hybrid thematic analysis and content analysis informed by the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications - Expanded.ResultsAdaptations were categorized by content (intervention components), context (how the intervention is delivered, based on the study, target population, intervention format, intervention delivery mode, study setting, study personnel), training, and evaluation. Of 51 adaptations, 43.1% involved content, 41.2% involved context, and 15.7% involved training and evaluation. Several key adaptations were noted: 1) Intervention content was tailored to patient preferences and needs (e.g., rewording elements to prevent stigmatization of mental health needs; adjusting BA techniques and documentation forms to improve patient buy-in and motivation). 2) Cohort-specific adaptations were recommended based on differing patient needs. 3) Compassion was identified by patients as the most important element.ConclusionsWe identified evidence-based mental health intervention components from other settings and adapted them to the perioperative setting for older adults. Informed by mixed-methods, we created an innovative and pragmatic patient-centered intervention bundle that is acceptable, feasible, and responsive to the needs of older surgical populations. This approach allowed us to identify implementation strategies to improve the reach, scalability, and sustainability of our bundle, and can guide future patient-centered intervention adaptations.

Project description:Background and aimsPeople with mental illnesses and substance abuse disorders are important targets for smoking cessation interventions. Mental health professionals (MHPs) are ideally placed to deliver interventions, but their attitudes may prevent this. This systematic review therefore aimed to identify and estimate quantitatively MHPs attitudes towards smoking and main barriers for providing smoking cessation support and to explore these attitudes in-depth through qualitative synthesis.MethodsThe online databases AMED, EMBASE, Medline, PsychINFO, HMIC and CINAHL were searched in March 2015 using terms relating to three concepts: 'attitudes', 'mental health professionals' and 'smoking cessation'. Quantitative or qualitative studies of any type were included. Proportions of MHPs' attitudes towards smoking and smoking cessation were pooled across studies using random effects meta-analysis. Qualitative findings were evaluated using thematic synthesis.ResultsThirty-eight studies including 16 369 participants were eligible for inclusion. Pooled proportions revealed that 42.2% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 35.7-48.8] of MHPs reported perceived barriers to smoking cessation interventions, 40.5% (95% CI = 30.4-51.0) negative attitudes towards smoking cessation and 45.0% (95% CI = 31.9-58.4) permissive attitudes towards smoking. The most commonly held beliefs were that patients are not interested in quitting (51.4%, 95% CI = 33.4-69.2) and that quitting smoking is too much for patients to take on (38%, 95% CI = 16.4-62.6). Qualitative findings were consistent with quantitative results, revealing a culture of smoking as 'the norm' and a perception of cigarettes as a useful tool for patients and staff.ConclusionsA significant proportion of mental health professionals hold attitudes and misconceptions that may undermine the delivery of smoking cessation interventions; many report a lack of time, training and confidence as main barriers to addressing smoking in their patients.

Project description:BackgroundAnxiety and depression are common among older adults and can intensify during perioperative periods, but few mental health interventions are designed for older surgical patients' unique needs. As part of the feasibility trial, we developed and adapted a perioperative mental health (PMH) bundle for older patients comprised of behavioral activation (BA) and medication optimization (MO) to ameliorate anxiety and depressive symptoms before, during, and after cardiac, orthopedic, and oncologic surgery.MethodsWe used mixed-methods including workshop studios with patients, caregivers, clinicians, researchers, and interventionists; intervention refinement and reflection meetings; patient case review meetings; intervention session audio-recordings and documentation forms; and patient and caregiver semi-structured interviews. We used the results to refine our PMH bundle. We used multiple analytical approaches to report the nature of adaptations, including hybrid thematic analysis and content analysis informed by the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications - Expanded.ResultsAdaptations were categorized by content (intervention components), context (how the intervention is delivered, based on the study, target population, intervention format, intervention delivery mode, study setting, study personnel), training, and evaluation. Of 51 adaptations, 43.1% involved content, 41.2% involved context, and 15.7% involved training and evaluation. Several key adaptations were noted: (1) Intervention content was tailored to patient preferences and needs (e.g., rewording elements to prevent stigmatization of mental health needs; adjusting BA techniques and documentation forms to improve patient buy-in and motivation). (2) Cohort-specific adaptations were recommended based on differing patient needs. (3) Compassion was identified by patients as the most important element.ConclusionsWe identified evidence-based mental health intervention components from other settings and adapted them to the perioperative setting for older adults. Informed by mixed-methods, we created an innovative and pragmatic patient-centered intervention bundle that is acceptable, feasible, and responsive to the needs of older surgical populations. This approach allowed us to identify implementation strategies to improve the reach, scalability, and sustainability of our bundle, and can guide future patient-centered intervention adaptations.Clinical trials registrationNCT05110690 (11/08/2021).

Project description:BackgroundDigital health apps are among the most visible facets of the ongoing digital transition in health care, with mental health-focused apps as one of the main therapeutic areas. However, concerns regarding their scientific robustness drove regulators to establish evaluation procedures, with Germany's Digitale Gesundheitsanwendungen program pioneering in app prescription with costs covered by statutory health insurance. Portugal gathers a set of conditions and requirements that position it as an excellent test bed for digital health apps. Its daunting mental health landscape reinforces the potential interest in new interventions. To understand if they would be acceptable, we need to understand the supply side's attitudes and perceptions toward them, that is, those of psychiatrists and psychologists.ObjectiveThis study aims to understand the attitudes and expectations of psychiatrists and psychologists toward digital mental health apps (DMHAs) in the Portuguese context, as well as perceived benefits, barriers, and actions to support their adoption.MethodsWe conducted a 2-stage sequential mixed methods study. Stage 1 consisted of a cross-sectional web survey adapted to the Portuguese context that was delivered to mental health professionals and psychologists. Stage 2 complemented the insights of the web survey results with a key opinion leader analysis.ResultsA total of 160 complete survey responses were recorded, most of which were from psychologists. This is the most extensive study on mental health professionals' attitudes and perceptions of DMHAs in Portugal. A total of 87.2% (136/156) of the respondents supported the opportunity to prescribe DMHAs. Increased health literacy (139/160, 86.9%), wider adherence to treatment (137/160, 85.6%), and proper disease management (127/160, 79.4%) were the most frequently agreed upon benefits of DMHAs. However, only less than half (68/156, 43.6%) of the respondents planned to prescribe or recommend DMHAs, with psychologists being more favorable than psychiatrists. Professionals faced substantial barriers, such as a lack of information on DMHAs (154/160, 96.3%), the level of initial training effort (115/160, 71.9%), and the need for adjustments of clinical processes and records (113/160, 70.6%). Professionals reported that having more information on the available apps and their suitability for health objectives (151/160, 94.4%), more scientific evidence of the validity of the apps as a health intervention (147/160, 91.9%), and established recommendations of apps by specific clinical guidelines or professional societies (145/160, 90.6%) would be essential to foster adoption.ConclusionsMore information about DMHAs regarding their clinical validity and how they work is necessary so that such an intervention can be adopted in Portugal. Recommendations from professional and scientific societies, as well as from governmental bodies, are strongly encouraged. Although the benefits of and the barriers to using these apps are consensual, more evidence, along with further promotion of mental health professionals' digital literacy, is needed.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.2196/41040.

Project description:IntroductionMental disorders pose a huge burden to both individuals and health systems. Symptoms and syndromes often remain undetected and untreated, resulting in comorbidity and chronification. Besides limited resources in healthcare systems, the treatment-gap is-to a large extent-caused by within-person barriers impeding early treatment seeking. These barriers include a lack of trust in professionals, fear of stigmatisation, or the desire to cope with problems without professional help. While unguided self-management interventions are not designed to replace psychotherapy, they may support early symptom assessment and recognition by reducing within-person barriers. Digital self-management solutions may also reduce inequalities in access to care due to external factors such as regional unavailability of services.Methods and analysisApproximately 1100 patients suffering from mild to moderate depressive, anxiety, sleep, eating or somatisation-related mental disorders will be randomised to receive either a low-threshold unguided digital self-management tool in the form of a transdiagnostic mental health app or care as usual. The primary outcomes will be mental health literacy, patient empowerment and access to care while secondary outcomes will be symptom distress and quality of life. Additional moderator and predictor variables are negative life events, personality functioning, client satisfaction, mental healthcare service use and application of self-management strategies. Data will be collected at baseline as well as 8 weeks and 6 months after randomisation. Data will be analysed using multiple imputation and analysis of covariance employing the intention-to-treat principle, while sensitivity analyses will be based on different multiple imputation parameters and a per-protocol analysis.Ethics and disseminationApproval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Educational Science and Psychology at the Freie Universität Berlin. The results will be submitted to peer-reviewed specialised journals and presented at national and international conferences.Trial registerationThe trial has been registered in the DRKS trial register (DRKS00022531);Pre-results.

Dataset Information

Patient empowerment in risk management: a mixed-method study to explore mental health professionals' perspective.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Patient empowerment in risk management: a mixed-method study to explore mental health professionals' perspective.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets