Rochelle Hine, Eleanor Mitchell, Michael Naughton, Liz Craig, Denise Azar, Michaela O’Regan, Anton Isaacs, Shane Bullock, Keith Sutton, Darryl Maybery
{"title":"Service Users’ Descriptions of Recovery-Oriented Elements of a Rural Mental Health Service","authors":"Rochelle Hine, Eleanor Mitchell, Michael Naughton, Liz Craig, Denise Azar, Michaela O’Regan, Anton Isaacs, Shane Bullock, Keith Sutton, Darryl Maybery","doi":"10.1080/0312407x.2023.2267037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recovery-oriented practice is the dominant framework for mental health services in Australia. However, evidence demonstrating recovery processes outside public services is scant. This study explores how key processes from the Connectedness, Hope, Identity, Meaning, and Empowerment (CHIME) personal recovery conceptual framework related to service-user experiences of a rural mental health service during the COVID-19 pandemic. Qualitative telephone or video-conference interviews were conducted with 19 service users. Deductive and inductive data analysis was employed, applying the CHIME framework as a predetermined organisational structure. Themes were constructed according to the CHIME framework categories. The data reflected all five categories; connectedness and empowerment were salient. Participants’ service-delivery experiences could either enhance or hinder connectedness, the cultivation of hope, a positive identity, meaning in life, and empowerment. Nonclinical aspects of their experience were viewed as an extension of treatment. Opportunities exist for mental health practitioners to intentionally prioritise and strengthen recovery-oriented practice. Trauma-informed approaches are consistent with and complement personal recovery principles. Accountability structures are needed to monitor recovery-oriented practice in mental health settings. Family-focused interventions also need strengthening to build connectedness, meaning, and hope.","PeriodicalId":47275,"journal":{"name":"Australian Social Work","volume":"82 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Social Work","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0312407x.2023.2267037","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL WORK","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Recovery-oriented practice is the dominant framework for mental health services in Australia. However, evidence demonstrating recovery processes outside public services is scant. This study explores how key processes from the Connectedness, Hope, Identity, Meaning, and Empowerment (CHIME) personal recovery conceptual framework related to service-user experiences of a rural mental health service during the COVID-19 pandemic. Qualitative telephone or video-conference interviews were conducted with 19 service users. Deductive and inductive data analysis was employed, applying the CHIME framework as a predetermined organisational structure. Themes were constructed according to the CHIME framework categories. The data reflected all five categories; connectedness and empowerment were salient. Participants’ service-delivery experiences could either enhance or hinder connectedness, the cultivation of hope, a positive identity, meaning in life, and empowerment. Nonclinical aspects of their experience were viewed as an extension of treatment. Opportunities exist for mental health practitioners to intentionally prioritise and strengthen recovery-oriented practice. Trauma-informed approaches are consistent with and complement personal recovery principles. Accountability structures are needed to monitor recovery-oriented practice in mental health settings. Family-focused interventions also need strengthening to build connectedness, meaning, and hope.
期刊介绍:
Australian Social Work is an international peer-reviewed journal reflecting current thinking and trends in Social Work. The Journal promotes the development of practice, policy and education, and publishes original research, theoretical papers and critical reviews that build on existing knowledge. The Journal also publishes reviews of relevant professional literature, commentary and analysis of social policies and encourages debate in the form of reader commentary on articles. Australian Social Work has grown out of the Australian context and continues to provide a vehicle for Australian and international authors. The Journal invites submission of papers from authors worldwide and all contributors are encouraged to present their work for an international readership.