Suppr超能文献

临床医生对复杂情感需求人群最佳社区护理实践的看法,以及如何实现这一目标:一项定性研究。

Clinician views on best practice community care for people with complex emotional needs and how it can be achieved: a qualitative study.

机构信息

NIHR Mental Health Policy Research Unit, Health Service and Population Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, Denmark Hill, London, SE5 8AF, UK.

NIHR Mental Health Policy Research Unit Complex Emotional Needs Lived Experience Working Group, Health Service and Population Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.

出版信息

BMC Psychiatry. 2022 Jan 28;22(1):72. doi: 10.1186/s12888-022-03711-x.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Individuals with Complex Emotional Needs (CEN) services, a working description to refer to the needs experienced by people who may have been diagnosed with a "personality disorder", face premature mortality, high rates of co-morbidity, service user and treatment costs. Service provision for this population is recurrently identified as needing to be transformed: there are serious concerns about quality, accessibility, fragmentation of the service system and the stigma and therapeutic pessimism service users encounter. Understanding clinician perspectives is vital for service transformation, as their views and experiences shed light on potential barriers to achieving good care, and how these might be overcome. In this study, we aimed to explore these views.

METHODS

We used a qualitative interview design. A total of fifty participants from a range of professions across specialist and generic community mental health services across England who provide care to people with CEN took part in six focus groups and sixteen one-to-one interviews. We analysed the data using a thematic approach.

FINDINGS

Main themes were: 1) Acknowledging the heterogeneity of needs: the need for a person-centred care approach and flexibility when working with CEN, 2) 'Still a diagnosis of exclusion': Exploring the healthcare provider-level barriers to providing care, and 3) Understanding the exclusionary culture: exploring the system-based barriers to providing care for CEN. Across these themes, staff highlighted in particular the need for care that was person-centred, relational, empathic, and trauma informed. Major barriers to achieving this are stigmatising attitudes and behaviour towards people with CEN, especially in generic mental health services, lack of development of coherent service systems offering clear long-term pathways and ready access to high quality treatment, and lack of well-developed structures for staff training and support.

DISCUSSION

Overall, the findings point towards clinician views as generally congruent with those of service users, reinforcing the need for priorities towards systemwide change to ensure that best practice care is provided for people with CEN. Particularly prominent is the need to put in place systemwide training and support for clinicians working with CEN, encompassing generic and specialist services, and to challenge the stigma still experienced throughout the system.

CONCLUSIONS

Staff working with this service user group report that delivering best practice care requires services to be flexible, integrated, and sustainably funded, and for staff to be supported through ongoing training and supervision.

摘要

背景

有复杂情感需求(CEN)服务的个体,是指那些可能被诊断为“人格障碍”的人的需求的工作描述,他们面临着过早死亡、高共病率、服务使用者和治疗成本。为这一人群提供服务被反复认为需要转变:人们严重关注服务质量、可及性、服务系统的碎片化以及服务使用者所面临的污名化和治疗悲观主义。了解临床医生的观点对于服务转型至关重要,因为他们的观点和经验揭示了实现良好护理的潜在障碍,以及如何克服这些障碍。在这项研究中,我们旨在探讨这些观点。

方法

我们使用了定性访谈设计。来自英格兰专门和通用社区心理健康服务机构的各种专业的 50 名参与者参加了六个焦点小组和十六个一对一访谈,他们为 CEN 提供护理。我们使用主题方法分析数据。

结果

主要主题包括:1)承认需求的异质性:需要以患者为中心的护理方法和灵活性,2)“仍然是排除性诊断”:探索医疗保健提供者层面提供护理的障碍,3)理解排斥性文化:探索为 CEN 提供护理的系统障碍。在这些主题中,工作人员特别强调需要以患者为中心、关系、同理心和创伤知情的护理。实现这一目标的主要障碍是对 CEN 患者的污名化态度和行为,尤其是在通用心理健康服务中,缺乏发展提供明确长期途径和便捷获得高质量治疗的连贯服务系统,以及缺乏发展良好的员工培训和支持结构。

讨论

总体而言,研究结果表明,临床医生的观点与服务使用者的观点大致一致,这强化了系统优先考虑变革的必要性,以确保为 CEN 患者提供最佳实践护理。特别突出的是需要为从事 CEN 工作的临床医生提供系统范围的培训和支持,涵盖通用和专业服务,并挑战整个系统中仍然存在的污名化。

结论

与该服务使用者群体合作的工作人员报告说,提供最佳实践护理需要服务具有灵活性、整合性和可持续性资金,并为工作人员提供持续的培训和监督。

相似文献

4
Service user experiences of community services for complex emotional needs: A qualitative thematic synthesis.
PLoS One. 2021 Apr 29;16(4):e0248316. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0248316. eCollection 2021.
6
Perspectives of service users and carers with lived experience of a diagnosis of personality disorder: A qualitative study.
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2024 Feb;31(1):55-65. doi: 10.1111/jpm.12959. Epub 2023 Aug 1.
7
Perspectives of culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) community members regarding mental health services: A qualitative analysis.
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2023 Aug;30(4):850-864. doi: 10.1111/jpm.12919. Epub 2023 Mar 22.
8
Provision and uptake of routine antenatal services: a qualitative evidence synthesis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Jun 12;6(6):CD012392. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012392.pub2.
10
Factors that influence participation in physical activity for people with bipolar disorder: a synthesis of qualitative evidence.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Jun 4;6(6):CD013557. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013557.pub2.

引用本文的文献

2
Access to psychological therapies amongst patients with a mental health diagnosis in primary care: a data linkage study.
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2024 Nov 6. doi: 10.1007/s00127-024-02787-y.
3
Lived experience codesign of self-harm interventions: a scoping review.
BMJ Open. 2023 Dec 27;13(12):e079090. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-079090.
4
Employment interventions to assist people who experience borderline personality disorder: A scoping review.
Int J Soc Psychiatry. 2023 Dec;69(8):1845-1855. doi: 10.1177/00207640231189424. Epub 2023 Jul 27.
5
Evaluation of international guidance for the community treatment of 'personality disorders': A systematic review.
PLoS One. 2023 Mar 13;18(3):e0264239. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0264239. eCollection 2023.

本文引用的文献

3
Service user experiences of community services for complex emotional needs: A qualitative thematic synthesis.
PLoS One. 2021 Apr 29;16(4):e0248316. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0248316. eCollection 2021.
4
Borderline Personality Disorder: To diagnose or not to diagnose? That is the question.
Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2020 Oct;29(5):972-981. doi: 10.1111/inm.12737. Epub 2020 May 19.
7
Comorbidity of Borderline Personality Disorder: Current Status and Future Directions.
Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2018 Dec;41(4):583-593. doi: 10.1016/j.psc.2018.07.009. Epub 2018 Oct 16.
8
(Mis)understanding trauma-informed approaches in mental health.
J Ment Health. 2018 Oct;27(5):383-387. doi: 10.1080/09638237.2018.1520973. Epub 2018 Oct 22.
9
Clinician attitudes towards borderline personality disorder: A 15-year comparison.
Personal Ment Health. 2018 Nov;12(4):309-320. doi: 10.1002/pmh.1429. Epub 2018 Aug 9.
10
Personality disorder services in England: findings from a national survey.
BJPsych Bull. 2017 Oct;41(5):247-253. doi: 10.1192/pb.bp.116.055251.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验