Mental Health Research Group, Jean McFarlane Building, Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
Patient and Public Involvement Contributor, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Sep 9;22(1):1140. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-08521-1.
Social integration, shared decision-making and personalised care are key elements of mental health and social care policy. Although these elements have been shown to improve service user and service-level outcomes, their translation into practice has been inconsistent and social isolation amongst service users persists.
To co-adapt, with service users, carers/supporters and health professionals, a web-based social network intervention, GENIE™, for use in secondary mental health services. The intervention is designed to support social activity and preference discussions between mental healthcare professionals and service users as a means of connecting individuals to local resources.
In Phase 1 (LEARN), we completed two systematic reviews to synthesise the existing evidence relating to the i) effectiveness and ii) the implementation of social network interventions for people with mental health difficulties. We undertook semi-structured interviews with a convenience sample of 15 stakeholders previously involved in the implementation of the intervention in physical healthcare settings. Interviews were also conducted with 5 national key stakeholders in mental health (e.g., policy makers, commissioners, third sector leads) to explore wider implementation issues. In Phase 2 (ADAPT), we worked iteratively with eight service users, nine carers, six professionals/volunteers and our patient and public advisory group. We drew on a framework for experience-based co-design, consisting of a series of stakeholder consultation events, to discuss the use of the social network intervention, in mental health services. Participants also considered factors that could serve as enablers, barriers, and challenges to local implementation.
Across the stakeholder groups there was broad agreement that the social network intervention had potential to be useful within mental health services. In terms of appropriate and effective implementation, such an intervention was predicted to work best within the care planning process, on discharge from hospital and within early intervention services. There were indications that the social connection mapping and needs assessment components were of most value and feasible to implement which points to the potential utility of a simplified version compared to the one used in this study. The training provided to facilitators was considered to be more important than their profession and there were indications that service users should be offered the opportunity to invite a carer, friend, or family member to join them in the intervention.
The GENIE™ intervention has been co-adapted for use in mental health services and a plan for optimal implementation has been co-produced. The next phase of the programme of work is to design and implement a randomised controlled trial to evaluate clinical and cost effectiveness of a simplified version of the intervention.
社会融合、共同决策和个性化护理是精神健康和社会保健政策的关键要素。尽管这些要素已被证明可以改善服务使用者和服务水平的结果,但它们在实践中的转化并不一致,服务使用者的社会隔离仍然存在。
与服务使用者、照顾者/支持者和卫生专业人员共同改编基于网络的社交网络干预措施 GENIE™,用于二级精神卫生服务。该干预措施旨在支持精神保健专业人员和服务使用者之间的社交活动和偏好讨论,作为将个人与当地资源联系起来的一种手段。
在第 1 阶段(学习)中,我们完成了两项系统评价,以综合现有关于以下方面的证据:i)社交网络干预措施对有精神健康困难的人的有效性和 ii)实施情况。我们对之前参与过物理医疗环境中干预措施实施的 15 名利益相关者进行了半结构式访谈。还对 5 名精神卫生领域的国家关键利益相关者(例如政策制定者、决策者、第三部门负责人)进行了访谈,以探讨更广泛的实施问题。在第 2 阶段(改编)中,我们与 8 名服务使用者、9 名照顾者、6 名专业人员/志愿者以及我们的患者和公众咨询小组合作。我们借鉴了一系列利益相关者协商活动的基于经验的共同设计框架,讨论了在精神卫生服务中使用社交网络干预措施的问题。参与者还考虑了可能成为当地实施的促进者、障碍和挑战的因素。
在各个利益相关者群体中,普遍认为社交网络干预措施有可能在精神卫生服务中发挥作用。就适当和有效的实施而言,这种干预措施在护理计划过程中、从医院出院后和早期干预服务中最有效。有迹象表明,社交关系映射和需求评估部分最有价值且易于实施,这表明与本研究中使用的版本相比,简化版本可能具有潜在的实用性。为促进者提供的培训被认为比他们的专业更重要,并且有迹象表明,应该为服务使用者提供邀请照顾者、朋友或家人参与干预的机会。
GENIE™干预措施已被改编用于精神卫生服务,并且已经共同制定了最佳实施计划。该计划工作的下一阶段是设计和实施一项随机对照试验,以评估干预措施简化版本的临床和成本效益。