Dataset Information

The impact of Recovery Colleges on mental health staff, services and society.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

Recovery Colleges are opening internationally. The evaluation focus has been on outcomes for Recovery College students who use mental health services. However, benefits may also arise for: staff who attend or co-deliver courses; the mental health and social care service hosting the Recovery College; and wider society. A theory-based change model characterising how Recovery Colleges impact at these higher levels is needed for formal evaluation of their impact, and to inform future Recovery College development. The aim of this study was to develop a stratified theory identifying candidate mechanisms of action and outcomes (impact) for Recovery Colleges at staff, services and societal levels.

Methods

Inductive thematic analysis of 44 publications identified in a systematised review was supplemented by collaborative analysis involving a lived experience advisory panel to develop a preliminary theoretical framework. This was refined through semi-structured interviews with 33 Recovery College stakeholders (service user students, peer/non-peer trainers, managers, community partners, clinicians) in three sites in England.

Results

Candidate mechanisms of action and outcomes were identified at staff, services and societal levels. At the staff level, experiencing new relationships may change attitudes and associated professional practice. Identified outcomes for staff included: experiencing and valuing co-production; changed perceptions of service users; and increased passion and job motivation. At the services level, Recovery Colleges often develop somewhat separately from their host system, reducing the reach of the college into the host organisation but allowing development of an alternative culture giving experiential learning opportunities to staff around co-production and the role of a peer workforce. At the societal level, partnering with community-based agencies gave other members of the public opportunities for learning alongside people with mental health problems and enabled community agencies to work with people they might not have otherwise. Recovery Colleges also gave opportunities to beneficially impact on community attitudes.

Conclusions

This study is the first to characterise the mechanisms of action and impact of Recovery Colleges on mental health staff, mental health and social care services, and wider society. The findings suggest that a certain distance is needed in the relationship between the Recovery College and its host organisation if a genuine cultural alternative is to be created. Different strategies are needed depending on what level of impact is intended, and this study can inform decision-making about mechanisms to prioritise. Future research into Recovery Colleges should include contextual evaluation of these higher level impacts, and investigate effectiveness and harms.

SUBMITTER: Crowther A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6998922 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSchools are important settings for increasing reach and uptake of adolescent mental health interventions. There is limited consensus on the focus and content of school-based mental health services (SBMHSs), particularly in low-resource settings. This study elicited the views of diverse stakeholders in two urban settings in India about their priorities and preferences for SBMHSs.MethodsWe completed semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions with adolescents (n = 191), parents (n = 9), teachers (n = 78), school counsellors (n = 15), clinical psychologists/psychiatrists (n = 7) in two urban sites in India (Delhi and Goa). Qualitative data were obtained on prioritized outcomes, preferred content and delivery methods, and indicated barriers.ResultsAll stakeholders indicated the need for and acceptability of SBMHSs. Adolescents prioritized resolution of life problems and exhibited a preference for practical guidance. Parents and teachers emphasized functional outcomes and preferred to be involved in interventions. In contrast, adolescents' favored limited involvement from parents and teachers, was related to widespread concerns about confidentiality. Face-to-face counselling was deemed to be the most acceptable delivery format; self-help was less frequently endorsed but was relatively more acceptable if blended with guidance or delivered using digital technology. Structured sensitization was recommended to promote adolescent's engagement. Providers endorsed a stepped care approach to address different levels of mental health need among adolescents.ConclusionSBMHSs are desired by adolescents and adult stakeholders in this setting where few such services exist. Sensitization activities are required to support implementation. School counsellors have an important role in identifying and treating adolescents with different levels of mental health needs, and a suite of interventions is needed to target these needs effectively and efficiently.

Project description:BackgroundHealth information technologies (HITs) are becoming increasingly recognized for their potential to provide innovative solutions to improve the delivery of mental health services and drive system reforms for better outcomes.ObjectiveThis paper describes the baseline results of a study designed to systematically monitor and evaluate the impact of implementing an HIT, namely the InnoWell Platform, into Australian mental health services to facilitate the iterative refinement of the HIT and the service model in which it is embedded to meet the needs of consumers and their supportive others as well as health professionals and service providers.MethodsData were collected via web-based surveys, semistructured interviews, and a workshop with staff from the mental health services implementing the InnoWell Platform to systematically monitor and evaluate its impact. Descriptive statistics, Fisher exact tests, and a reliability analysis were used to characterize the findings from the web-based surveys, including variability in the results between the services. Semistructured interviews were coded using a thematic analysis, and workshop data were coded using a basic content analysis.ResultsBaseline data were collected from the staff of 3 primary youth mental health services (n=18), a counseling service for veterans and their families (n=23), and a helpline for consumers affected by eating disorders and negative body image issues (n=6). As reported via web-based surveys, staff members across the services consistently agreed or strongly agreed that there was benefit associated with using technology as part of their work (38/47, 81%) and that the InnoWell Platform had the potential to improve outcomes for consumers (27/45, 60%); however, there was less certainty as to whether their consumers' capability to use technology aligned with how the InnoWell Platform would be used as part of their mental health care (11/45, 24% of the participants strongly disagreed or disagreed; 15/45, 33% were neutral; and 19/45, 42% strongly agreed or agreed). During the semistructured interviews (n=3) and workshop, participants consistently indicated that the InnoWell Platform was appropriate for their respective services; however, they questioned whether the services' respective consumers had the digital literacy required to use the technology. Additional potential barriers to implementation included health professionals' digital literacy and service readiness for change.ConclusionsDespite agreement among participants that HITs have the potential to result in improved outcomes for consumers and services, service readiness for change (eg, existing technology infrastructure and the digital literacy of staff and consumers) was noted to potentially impact the success of implementation, with less than half (20/45, 44%) of the participants indicating that their service was ready to implement new technologies to enhance mental health care. Furthermore, participants reported mixed opinions as to whether it was their responsibility to recommend technology as part of standard care.

Project description:IntroductionPolicies internationally endorse the recovery paradigm as the appropriate foundation for youth mental health services. However, given that this paradigm is grounded in the views of adults with severe mental illness, applicability to youth services and relevance to young people is uncertain, particularly as little is known about young people's views. A comprehensive understanding of the experiences and expectations of young people is critical to developing youth mental health services that are acceptable, accessible, effective and relevant.AimTo inform development of policy and youth services, the study described in this protocol aims to develop a comprehensive account of the experiences and expectations of 12-17 year olds as they encounter mental disorders and transition through specialist mental health services. Data will be analysed to model recovery from the adolescents' perspective.Method and analysisThis grounded theory study will use quantitative and qualitative data collected in interviews with 12-17 year olds engaged with specialist Child/Youth Mental Health Service in Queensland, Australia. Interviews will explore adolescents' expectations and experiences of mental disorder, and of services, as they transition through specialist mental health services, including the meaning of their experiences and ideas of 'recovery' and how their experiences and expectations are shaped. Data collection and analysis will use grounded theory methods.Ethics and disseminationAdolescents' experiences will be presented as a mid-range theory. The research will provide tangible recommendations for youth-focused mental health policy and practice. Findings will be disseminated within academic literature and beyond to participants, health professionals, mental health advocacy groups and policy and decision makers via publications, research summaries, conferences and workshops targeting different audiences. Ethical and research governance approvals have been obtained from relevant Human Research Ethics committees and all sites involved.