Schön Ulla-Karin, Grim Katarina, Wallin Lars, Rosenberg David, Svedberg Petra
a School of Education, Health and Social Studies , Dalarna University , Falun , Sweden.
b Institution for Social Work , Karlstad University , Karlstad , Sweden.
Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being. 2018 Dec;13(1):1421352. doi: 10.1080/17482631.2017.1421352.
Shared decision making, SDM, in psychiatric services, supports users to experience a greater sense of involvement in treatment, self-efficacy, autonomy and reduced coercion. Decision tools adapted to the needs of users have the potential to support SDM and restructure how users and staff work together to arrive at shared decisions. The aim of this study was to describe and analyse the implementation process of an SDM intervention for users of psychiatric services in Sweden.
The implementation was studied through a process evaluation utilizing both quantitative and qualitative methods. In designing the process evaluation for the intervention, three evaluation components were emphasized: contextual factors, implementation issues and mechanisms of impact.
The study addresses critical implementation issues related to decision-making authority, the perceived decision-making ability of users and the readiness of the service to increase influence and participation. It also emphasizes the importance of facilitation, as well as suggesting contextual adaptations that may be relevant for the local organizations.
The results indicate that staff perceived the decision support tool as user-friendly and useful in supporting participation in decision-making, and suggest that such concrete supports to participation can be a factor in implementation if adequate attention is paid to organizational contexts and structures.
在精神科服务中,共享决策(SDM)有助于服务使用者在治疗过程中获得更强的参与感、自我效能感和自主感,并减少强制治疗的情况。根据使用者需求定制的决策工具,有可能支持共享决策,并重塑使用者与工作人员共同做出共享决策的工作方式。本研究旨在描述和分析瑞典针对精神科服务使用者的共享决策干预措施的实施过程。
通过运用定量和定性方法的过程评估来研究该实施过程。在设计干预措施的过程评估时,重点强调了三个评估要素:背景因素、实施问题和影响机制。
该研究探讨了与决策权、使用者的决策能力认知以及服务机构提升影响力和参与度的意愿相关的关键实施问题。研究还强调了促进工作的重要性,并提出了可能适用于当地机构的背景调整建议。
结果表明,工作人员认为决策支持工具对使用者友好且有助于支持参与决策,并表明如果充分关注组织背景和结构,这种对参与的具体支持可以成为实施过程中的一个因素。