Suppr超能文献

英国社区精神病学中的权力和其他非正式压力。

Leverage and other informal pressures in community psychiatry in England.

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, England.

出版信息

Int J Law Psychiatry. 2013 Mar-Apr;36(2):100-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2013.01.002. Epub 2013 Feb 9.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Informal practices aimed at managing psychiatric patients in the community setting fall outside legal and policy provision or guidance. "Leverage" is an informal practice whereby practitioners attempt to influence patients' treatment adherence by, for example, making patients' access to subsidised housing conditional upon adherence to treatment or by making treatment adherence a condition of patients' avoidance of financial control. Lower rates of leverage are reported in the UK compared to the USA, possibly due to differences between the US and European social welfare systems. These differences raise questions as to the international comparability of leverage practices described in the literature. The study aimed to capture patients' experiences and perceptions of pressures and to explore (a) whether "leverage" can be distinguished from other pressures, and (b) how a concept of leverage derived from patient experiences in England might fit with the literature to date. In this article we present the different types of pressure that we identified from patients' accounts, and a set of criteria derived for the purpose of distinguishing between these different types of pressure.

METHOD

Twenty-nine qualitative interviews with a purposive subsample from a study of leverage in the English mental health system were analysed.

RESULTS

Participants reported a range of what can be classified as both leveraged and non-leveraged pressures. These were perceived as pressures to adhere to treatment, as well as "staying well." Leveraged pressures were distinguishable from non-leveraged pressures by the presence of three features: conditionality, a lever and direct communication.

CONCLUSIONS

The portrayal of "leverage" in the current literature does not fully capture patient experiences of pressure. Our analysis offers a clearer concept of leverage and other pressures that influence patients, and which may have different legal, ethical and clinical implications.

摘要

目的

旨在管理社区环境中精神科患者的非正规做法超出了法律和政策规定或指导。“利用”是一种非正规做法,即从业者试图通过例如使患者获得补贴住房的条件取决于对治疗的依从性,或者使治疗依从性成为患者避免财务控制的条件,来影响患者的治疗依从性。与美国相比,英国报告的利用率较低,这可能是由于美国和欧洲社会福利制度之间的差异。这些差异提出了关于文献中描述的利用做法的国际可比性的问题。该研究旨在捕捉患者对压力的体验和看法,并探讨(a)“利用”是否可以与其他压力区分开来,以及(b)从英格兰患者的经验中得出的利用概念如何与迄今为止的文献相契合。在本文中,我们从患者的叙述中确定了不同类型的压力,并为区分这些不同类型的压力制定了一套标准。

方法

对英格兰精神卫生系统中利用杠杆作用研究的一个有目的子样本进行了 29 次定性访谈。

结果

参与者报告了一系列可归类为利用和非利用压力的压力。这些压力被视为对治疗的依从性以及“保持健康”的压力。利用压力与非利用压力的区别在于存在三个特征:条件性、杠杆和直接沟通。

结论

当前文献中对“利用”的描述并未完全捕捉到患者对压力的体验。我们的分析提供了一个更清晰的利用和其他影响患者的压力的概念,这可能具有不同的法律、伦理和临床意义。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验