Slade Mike, Amering Michaela, Oades Lindsay
Health Service and Population Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Epidemiol Psichiatr Soc. 2008 Apr-Jun;17(2):128-37. doi: 10.1017/s1121189x00002827.
To review developments in recovery-focussed mental health services internationally.
Two forms of 'recovery' which have been used in the literature are considered, and international examples of recovery-focussed initiatives reviews. A 'litmus test' for a recovery-focussed service is proposed.
'Clinical recovery' has emerged from professional literature, focuses on sustained remission and restoration of functioning, is invariant across individuals, and has been used to establish rates of recovery. 'Personal recovery' has emerged from consumer narratives, focuses on living a satisfying, hopeful and contributing life even with limitations caused by the illness, varies across individuals, and the empirical evidence base relates to stages of change more than overall prevalence rates. Clinical and personal recovery are different. Two innovative, generalisable and empirically investigated examples are given of implementing a focus on personal recovery: the Collaborative Recovery Model in Australia, and Trialogues in German-speaking Europe. The role of medication is an indicator: services in which all service users are prescribed medication, in which the term 'compliance' is used, in which the reasoning bias is present of attributing improvement to medication and deterioration to the person, and in which contact with and discussion about the service user revolves around medication issues, are not personal recovery-focussed services.
The term 'Recovery' has been used in different ways, so conceptual clarity is important. Developing a focus on personal recovery is more than a cosmetic change--it will entail fundamental shifts in the values of mental health services.
回顾国际上以康复为重点的心理健康服务的发展情况。
考虑文献中使用的两种“康复”形式,并对以康复为重点的举措进行国际案例综述。提出了一项针对以康复为重点的服务的“试金石”。
“临床康复”源自专业文献,侧重于功能的持续缓解和恢复,个体间保持不变,并已用于确定康复率。“个人康复”源自消费者的叙述,侧重于即使在疾病造成的限制下仍能过上满意、充满希望且有意义的生活,因人而异,且实证证据基础更多地与变化阶段相关,而非总体患病率。临床康复和个人康复有所不同。给出了两个关于实施以个人康复为重点的创新、可推广且经过实证研究的例子:澳大利亚的协作康复模式和德语区欧洲的三方对话。药物治疗的作用是一个指标:所有服务使用者都被开药、使用“依从性”一词、存在将改善归因于药物治疗而将恶化归因于个人的推理偏差,以及与服务使用者的接触和讨论都围绕药物治疗问题展开的服务,并非以个人康复为重点的服务。
“康复”一词有不同的用法,因此概念清晰很重要。将重点转向个人康复不仅仅是表面的改变——这将需要心理健康服务价值观的根本转变。