The Hospital for Sick Children, Peter Gilgan Centre for Research and Learning, 686 Bay Street, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 0A4, Canada; Institute of Medical Science, University of Toronto, 1 King's Circle, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 3K1, Canada.
Bloorview Research Institute, Holland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital, 150 Kilgour Road, Toronto, Ontario, M4G 1R8, Canada; Department of Physical Therapy, University of Toronto, 160-500 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1V7, Canada.
Soc Sci Med. 2020 May;253:112948. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.112948. Epub 2020 Mar 20.
Trust is vital in mental healthcare where uncertainty and risk prevail and where relationship building is central to effective service delivery. Despite its significance, research on trust, particularly among multi-disciplinary healthcare teams and between service providers and users is limited and explored only tangentially within early psychosis intervention (EPI) programs. An institutional ethnographic approach is used to examine how trust within an EPI setting is produced and operates. Drawing on participant observation, textual analysis of clinic documents and in-depth interviews with 27 participants (staff, young people and family members), our analysis outlines how the clinic manager's and staff's resistance to hospital rulings that impeded EPI policy principles were part of the extended sequence of activities that produced trust. These acts of resistance, alongside the clinic manager's reflective leadership practices, cultivated spaces for staff to take risks, share their ideas and build consensus - culminating in staff-designed protocols that produced trust among one another, and between service providers and young people and their families. Drawing from Brown and Calnan's framework of "vicious" and "virtuous" cycles of (dis)trust, we highlight how management and staff responses to vulnerability and uncertainty generated trust through their communication practices and knowledge sharing. We also suggest that protocols to manage the risk of medication non-adherence and treatment dis-engagement among young people contained regulatory functions, pointing to the complex interplay of trust, control and risk. Study implications suggest shifting the emphasis from risk management and quality governance as an organizing framework in mental health to a framework based on trust.
信任在精神卫生保健中至关重要,因为不确定性和风险普遍存在,而建立关系是有效提供服务的核心。尽管信任意义重大,但关于信任的研究,尤其是在多学科医疗团队之间以及服务提供者和使用者之间的信任研究仍然有限,并且仅在早期精神病干预 (EPI) 计划中得到了间接探讨。本研究采用机构民族志方法来研究 EPI 环境中的信任是如何产生和运作的。通过参与观察、对诊所文件的文本分析以及对 27 名参与者(工作人员、年轻人和家庭成员)的深入访谈,我们的分析概述了诊所经理和工作人员如何抵制妨碍 EPI 政策原则的医院规定,这些抵制行为是产生信任的一系列扩展活动的一部分。这些抵制行为,以及诊所经理的反思性领导实践,为工作人员创造了冒险、分享想法和达成共识的空间,最终制定了工作人员设计的协议,在彼此之间以及服务提供者和年轻人及其家人之间产生了信任。本研究借鉴了 Brown 和 Calnan 的“(不信任的)恶性”和“良性”循环框架,强调了管理层和工作人员如何通过沟通实践和知识共享应对脆弱性和不确定性来建立信任。我们还认为,管理年轻人药物不依从和治疗中断风险的协议具有监管功能,这表明信任、控制和风险之间存在复杂的相互作用。研究意义表明,需要将重点从风险管理和质量治理转移到基于信任的精神卫生组织框架上。