de Rooy Magali J, Milota Megan M, van Geelen Stefan M, de Bruin Léon C, Scheepers Floortje E
Department of Psychiatry, University Medical Centre Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Department of Bioethics and Health Humanities, Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, The Netherlands.
BJPsych Open. 2025 Sep 4;11(5):e194. doi: 10.1192/bjo.2025.10810.
Although diagnosis acceptance is frequently discussed in psychiatric practice and research, both components - psychiatric diagnoses and the act of accepting them - are inherently unclear.
The present study aimed to evaluate how well existing theoretical concepts of diagnosis acceptance align with patient experiences and to explore themes related to diagnosis acceptance.
An iterative thematic analysis was conducted on 30 illness narratives from (former) psychiatric patients. The analysis proceeded through three phases: (a) review of transcripts for overall narratives and attitudes toward diagnoses, (b) extraction of detailed data using a narrative summary template and (c) refining and comparison of themes across narratives.
Existing acceptance theories insufficiently captured the lived experiences reflected in the narratives. Attitudes toward diagnoses were multidimensional, fluctuated over time and were often described using terms other than 'acceptance'. Participants emphasised the importance of sharing their stories without being defined by a diagnosis and conflated DSM-5 classifications with broader diagnostic terms, highlighting challenges in communication of psychiatric constructs. Disagreement with diagnoses did not necessarily hinder therapeutic relationships, emphasising the importance of collaboration over consensus.
Given the limited practical application of existing acceptance theories and our findings on contextual factors relevant to psychiatric diagnosis attitudes, the necessity of diagnosis acceptance as a stand-alone goal for positive outcomes should be questioned. Rather than imposing classifications, creating co-constructed narratives may be more effective. Researchers and clinicians are encouraged to adopt narrative approaches to better understand and support patients, thereby fostering reciprocal, patient-centred mental healthcare.
尽管在精神病学实践和研究中经常讨论诊断接受度,但精神病学诊断及其接受行为这两个组成部分本质上都不明确。
本研究旨在评估现有的诊断接受度理论概念与患者体验的契合程度,并探索与诊断接受度相关的主题。
对30名( former )精神病患者的疾病叙述进行了迭代主题分析。分析过程分为三个阶段:(a)审查病历以了解总体叙述和对诊断的态度,(b)使用叙述性总结模板提取详细数据,以及(c)完善和比较各叙述中的主题。
现有的接受度理论未能充分捕捉叙述中反映的实际经历。对诊断的态度是多维度的,随时间波动,且常用“接受”以外的术语来描述。参与者强调了在不被诊断定义的情况下分享故事的重要性,并将DSM-5分类与更宽泛的诊断术语混为一谈,凸显了精神病学概念沟通方面的挑战。对诊断的分歧不一定会阻碍治疗关系,强调了协作而非达成共识的重要性。
鉴于现有接受度理论的实际应用有限,以及我们对与精神病诊断态度相关的背景因素的研究结果,将诊断接受度作为积极结果的独立目标的必要性值得质疑。与其强加分类,创建共同构建的叙述可能更有效。鼓励研究人员和临床医生采用叙述性方法,以更好地理解和支持患者,从而促进以患者为中心的双向精神卫生保健。