van Dee Violet, Swildens Wilma, Schnack Hugo G, Cahn Wiepke
Brain Center, Department of Psychiatry, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, 3508, Utrecht, GA, The Netherlands.
Altrecht Institution for Mental Health Care, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Community Ment Health J. 2025 Feb;61(2):300-313. doi: 10.1007/s10597-024-01399-9. Epub 2024 Dec 10.
There is no consensus on the definition of recovery of people with psychosis. This may be attributed to the broad concept including clinical, functional and personal recovery domains and the diverse interests of stakeholders involved. We hypothesized that service users, informal caregivers and healthcare professionals would exhibit differences in prioritization, reflecting varying roles and viewpoints. Through an open online anonymous questionnaire, stakeholders shared their perspectives on most important aspects of clinical, functional and personal recovery and on facilitators and barriers of recovery. Stakeholder collaboration in study design and interpretation enhanced the study's robustness. The answers on open questions of respondents were categorized for statistical analyses to compare the answers between respondent groups on the different aspects of recovery. 226 stakeholders participated. While commonalities prevailed, distinctions emerged in recovery domain priorities. Service users and informal caregivers accorded equal importance to clinical, functional and personal recovery, whereas healthcare professionals emphasized clinical recovery. Regarding functional recovery, service users seemed to focus on practical issues while informal caregivers addressed the underlying causes. Disparities were notable in the role of healthcare that was considered as both a facilitator or a barrier to recovery, with informal caregivers prioritizing aspects of healthcare more frequently as most important than healthcare professionals. While commonalities prevailed, we identified several differences in prioritizing recovery domains among stakeholder groups. Awareness and understanding of these differences is crucial for effective communication and collaboration between stakeholders in recovery-oriented healthcare. The study underscores the need for ongoing dialogue between stakeholders.
对于精神病患者康复的定义，目前尚无共识。这可能归因于该概念涵盖临床、功能和个人康复领域，且涉及的利益相关者兴趣多样。我们推测服务使用者、非正式照护者和医疗保健专业人员在优先事项上会表现出差异，这反映了他们不同的角色和观点。通过一份开放式在线匿名问卷，利益相关者分享了他们对临床、功能和个人康复最重要方面以及康复促进因素和障碍的看法。利益相关者在研究设计和解释方面的合作增强了研究的稳健性。对受访者开放式问题的答案进行分类以便进行统计分析，以比较不同受访者群体在康复不同方面的答案。226名利益相关者参与了调查。虽然存在共性，但在康复领域的优先事项上也出现了差异。服务使用者和非正式照护者对临床、功能和个人康复给予同等重视，而医疗保健专业人员则强调临床康复。关于功能康复，服务使用者似乎关注实际问题，而非正式照护者则关注根本原因。在医疗保健被视为康复促进因素或障碍的作用方面存在显著差异，非正式照护者比医疗保健专业人员更频繁地将医疗保健的各个方面列为最重要的方面。虽然存在共性，但我们在利益相关者群体对康复领域的优先排序上发现了一些差异。认识和理解这些差异对于以康复为导向的医疗保健中利益相关者之间的有效沟通与合作至关重要。该研究强调了利益相关者之间持续对话的必要性。
