Eassom Erica, Giacco Domenico, Dirik Aysegul, Priebe Stefan
Unit for Social and Community Psychiatry (World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Mental Health Services Development), Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
BMJ Open. 2014 Oct 3;4(10):e006108. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006108.
To synthesise the evidence on implementing family involvement in the treatment of patients with psychosis with a focus on barriers, problems and facilitating factors.
Systematic review of studies evaluating the involvement of families in tripartite communication between health professionals, 'families' (or other unpaid carers) and adult patients, in a single-family context. A theoretical thematic analysis approach and thematic synthesis were used.
A systematic electronic search was carried out in seven databases, using database-specific search strategies and controlled vocabulary. A secondary manual search of grey literature was performed as well as using forwards and backwards snowballing techniques.
A total of 43 studies were included. The majority featured qualitative data (n=42), focused solely on staff perspectives (n=32) and were carried out in the UK (n=23). Facilitating the training and ongoing supervision needs of staff are necessary but not sufficient conditions for a consistent involvement of families. Organisational cultures and paradigms can work to limit family involvement, and effective implementation appears to operate via a whole team coordinated effort at every level of the organisation, supported by strong leadership. Reservations about family involvement regarding power relations, fear of negative outcomes and the need for an exclusive patient-professional relationship may be explored and addressed through mutually trusting relationships.
Implementing family involvement carries additional challenges beyond those generally associated with translating research to practice. Implementation may require a cultural and organisational shift towards working with families. Family work can only be implemented if this is considered a shared goal of all members of a clinical team and/or mental health service, including the leaders of the organisation. This may imply a change in the ethos and practices of clinical teams, as well as the establishment of working routines that facilitate family involvement approaches.
综合关于让家庭参与精神病患者治疗的证据,重点关注障碍、问题和促进因素。
对评估家庭在卫生专业人员、“家庭”(或其他无薪照护者)和成年患者之间的三方沟通中参与情况的研究进行系统综述,研究背景为单一家庭环境。采用理论主题分析方法和主题综合法。
使用特定数据库的检索策略和控制词汇,在七个数据库中进行系统的电子检索。还对灰色文献进行了二次手工检索,并采用了向前和向后滚雪球技术。
共纳入43项研究。大多数研究有定性数据(n = 42),仅关注工作人员的观点(n = 32),且在英国开展(n = 23)。满足工作人员的培训和持续监督需求是家庭持续参与的必要但不充分条件。组织文化和范式可能会限制家庭参与,有效的实施似乎需要组织各级的整个团队协同努力,并得到强有力的领导支持。关于权力关系、对负面结果的担忧以及对排他性患者 - 专业人员关系的需求等对家庭参与的保留意见,可通过相互信任的关系来探讨和解决。
实施家庭参与带来了超出一般将研究转化为实践所面临的额外挑战。实施可能需要在文化和组织层面转向与家庭合作。只有当这被视为临床团队和/或心理健康服务所有成员(包括组织领导者)的共同目标时,家庭工作才能得以实施。这可能意味着临床团队的理念和实践和实践的改变,以及建立便于家庭参与方法的工作常规。