Dataset Information

Roles, Facilitators and Challenges of Employment Support Specialists Assisting Young People with Mental Health Conditions.

ABSTRACT: Purpose The present study aimed to understand the roles, effective strategies and facilitators, and challenges of employment support specialists (ESS) in assisting young people with mental health conditions (MHCs) gain and sustain employment in Singapore. Methods An interpretative qualitative design using an inductive approach was adopted for this study. Using a semi-structured interview guide, in-depth interviews were conducted with twenty ESS employed with mental health service providers or other community-based centers. Verbatim transcripts of the interviews were thematically analyzed using inductive methods. ESS were broadly classified as "any professionals providing employment-related support to people with MHCs". Results Majority of the ESS were employed at a tertiary psychiatric institute. Participants included vocational and occupational specialists, case managers and other clinical professionals. Three key themes emerged from the data: (i) descriptions of roles undertaken by the ESS depicting a wide range of services and requisite skillsets; (ii) facilitators that benefit young people with MHCs' in terms of job placement, for example, ESS' attitudes and attributes, and their clients' disposition; and (iii) challenges that deter effective job placements, such as factors pertaining to the ESS themselves, their clients, and clients' employers. Under this theme, ESS also proposed ways to improve employment opportunities of people with MHCs. Conclusions This study provided insight into a range of tasks performed and challenges faced by ESS in Singapore while assisting their clients. There is a need to address ESS' challenges and expectations in order to enhance their efficiency and aid reintegration of young people with MHCs into the workforce and the society.

SUBMITTER: Vaingankar JA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8172398 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimTo assess the effectiveness of supported employment interventions for improving competitive employment in populations of people with conditions other than only severe mental illness.BackgroundSupported employment interventions have been extensively tested in severe mental illness populations. These approaches may be beneficial outside of these populations.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycInfo, Web of Science, Scopus, JSTOR, PEDro, OTSeeker, and NIOSHTIC for trials including unemployed people with any condition and including severe mental illness if combined with other co-morbidities or other specific circumstances (e.g., homelessness). We excluded trials where inclusion was based on severe mental illness alone. Two reviewers independently assessed risk of bias (RoB v2.0) and four reviewers extracted data. We assessed rates of competitive employment as compared to traditional vocational rehabilitation or waiting list/services as usual.FindingsTen randomised controlled trials (913 participants) were included. Supported employment was more effective than control interventions for improving competitive employment in seven trials: in people with affective disorders [risk ratio (RR) 10.61 (1.49, 75.38)]; mental disorders and justice involvement [RR 4.44 (1.36,14.46)]; veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) [RR 2.73 (1.64, 4.54)]; formerly incarcerated veterans [RR 2.17 (1.09, 4.33)]; people receiving methadone treatment [RR 11.5 (1.62, 81.8)]; veterans with spinal cord injury at 12 months [RR 2.46 (1.16, 5.22)] and at 24 months [RR 2.81 (1.98, 7.37)]; and young people not in employment, education, or training [RR 5.90 (1.91-18.19)]. Three trials did not show significant benefits from supported employment: populations of workers with musculoskeletal injuries [RR 1.38 (1.00, 1.89)]; substance abuse [RR 1.85 (0.65, 5.41)]; and formerly homeless people with mental illness [RR 1.55 (0.76, 3.15)]. Supported employment interventions may be beneficial to people from more diverse populations than those with severe mental illness alone. Defining competitive employment and increasing (and standardising) measurement of non-vocational outcomes may help to improve research in this area.

Project description:BackgroundPeer support is being integrated within mental health services to further the development of a recovery approach. However, the most effective models and formats of intervention delivery are unknown. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the effectiveness of peer support for improving outcomes for people with lived experience of mental health conditions, when delivered as group interventions.MethodsStudies reporting randomised controlled trials of group peer support interventions for people experiencing mental health conditions were identified by searching MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase and Cochrane CENTRAL, from inception until July 12th 2019 and undertaking supplementary searches. Included studies were assessed for risk of bias and meta-analyses were conducted if three or more trials provided usable data.ResultsEight trials met eligibility criteria, providing data from 2131 participants. Six trials had either high or unclear risk of bias. Interventions were categorised as mutual support groups, or peer support groups, sub-categorised as anti-stigma or self-management interventions. Meta-analyses were only possible for peer support groups and five outcomes. We found evidence that group peer support may make small improvements to overall recovery but not hope or empowerment individually, or to clinical symptoms. Evidence for effectiveness for outcomes which could not be meta-analysed was mixed.ConclusionsFindings from the few eligible trials suggest group peer support interventions may be specifically effective for supporting personal recovery and have a limited impact on other outcomes, though there were some risks of bias to study findings. Interventions were heterogeneous and most social outcomes were absent in the literature, highlighting further limitations to the current evidence-base. There is insufficient evidence available from trials of group peer support torecommend the routine implementation of these interventions across mainstream mental health services at present. More high-quality trials of peer-developed, group peer support interventions are needed in order tomake firm conclusions about intervention effectiveness.

Dataset Information

Roles, Facilitators and Challenges of Employment Support Specialists Assisting Young People with Mental Health Conditions.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets