Talking About Things Important to Me: Mental Health Consumers' Experiences of Consumer-Rated Measures.

S Lawn, D Jiggins, R Dickson, T Coombs
{"title":"Talking About Things Important to Me: Mental Health Consumers' Experiences of Consumer-Rated Measures.","authors":"S Lawn, D Jiggins, R Dickson, T Coombs","doi":"10.1111/inm.13407","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Since 2002, National Outcomes and Casemix Collection of clinician-rated and consumer-rated outcome measures has become part of routine care within Australian clinical mental health services, aiming to ensure that services understand, improve and are accountable for effectiveness of treatment and care provision. Consumer-rated outcome measures, implemented well, support basic human rights of consumers to be asked, heard and included equally in their own care. However, their use has lagged due to clinician inertia, uncertainty about their value to clinical care, assumptions about consumers' capacity to complete the measures and organisational cultural issues that have hampered more holistic assessment, consumer inclusion and care collaboration. Much is known about negative, largely tokenistic use of such measures, poor uptake and dominance of clinical approaches to measurement that privilege clinical expertise; however, little is known about consumers' positive experiences of using consumer-rated measures, Therefore, our aims were as follows: to seek the views and experiences of mental health consumers of using consumer-rated measures in their encounters with clinicians; to understand better whether there were benefits (and if so what) of consumer-rated measures being used in routine mental health practice; to understand how feedback on the use of consumer-rated measures can inform training for mental health staff; and to promote their wider use within mental health services. In-depth interviews conducted with 10 Australian mental health consumers used interview questions co-designed with lived experience and clinical advocates. Descriptive thematic analyses produced four themes emphasising consumers' preferences for completing the measures, the importance of explaining their purpose, how the process validated their feelings and was an opportunity for self-reflection, sense-making, trust-building, and transparency in the encounter and empowerment. This research offers recommendations about the value of effective implementation of consumer-rated measures.</p>","PeriodicalId":94051,"journal":{"name":"International journal of mental health nursing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of mental health nursing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/inm.13407","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Since 2002, National Outcomes and Casemix Collection of clinician-rated and consumer-rated outcome measures has become part of routine care within Australian clinical mental health services, aiming to ensure that services understand, improve and are accountable for effectiveness of treatment and care provision. Consumer-rated outcome measures, implemented well, support basic human rights of consumers to be asked, heard and included equally in their own care. However, their use has lagged due to clinician inertia, uncertainty about their value to clinical care, assumptions about consumers' capacity to complete the measures and organisational cultural issues that have hampered more holistic assessment, consumer inclusion and care collaboration. Much is known about negative, largely tokenistic use of such measures, poor uptake and dominance of clinical approaches to measurement that privilege clinical expertise; however, little is known about consumers' positive experiences of using consumer-rated measures, Therefore, our aims were as follows: to seek the views and experiences of mental health consumers of using consumer-rated measures in their encounters with clinicians; to understand better whether there were benefits (and if so what) of consumer-rated measures being used in routine mental health practice; to understand how feedback on the use of consumer-rated measures can inform training for mental health staff; and to promote their wider use within mental health services. In-depth interviews conducted with 10 Australian mental health consumers used interview questions co-designed with lived experience and clinical advocates. Descriptive thematic analyses produced four themes emphasising consumers' preferences for completing the measures, the importance of explaining their purpose, how the process validated their feelings and was an opportunity for self-reflection, sense-making, trust-building, and transparency in the encounter and empowerment. This research offers recommendations about the value of effective implementation of consumer-rated measures.

谈论对我重要的事情:心理健康消费者对消费者评级措施的体验。
自 2002 年以来,收集临床医生评分和消费者评分结果的国家结果和病例组合已成为澳大利亚临床精神 健康服务中常规护理的一部分,旨在确保服务机构了解、改进治疗和护理的有效性,并对其负责。消费者评定结果的措施如果实施得当,就能支持消费者的基本人权,即平等地询问、听取和参与自己的护理工作。然而,由于临床医生的惰性、对其临床护理价值的不确定性、对消费者完成测量能力的假设,以及阻碍更全面评估、消费者融入和护理合作的组织文化问题,这些措施的使用一直滞后。人们对此类测量方法的消极使用、象征性使用、使用率低以及临床测量方法的主导地位等问题了解甚多;然而,人们对消费者使用消费者评级测量方法的积极体验却知之甚少:了解心理健康消费者在与临床医生的接触中使用消费者评定量表的观点和经验;更好地了解在常规心理健康实践中使用消费者评定量表是否有益处(如果有益处的话);了解使用消费者评定量表的反馈如何为心理健康工作人员的培训提供信息;以及促进消费者评定量表在心理健康服务中的广泛使用。我们对 10 名澳大利亚心理健康消费者进行了深入访谈,访谈中使用的问题都是根据他们的生活经验和临床倡导者共同设计的。描述性主题分析产生了四个主题,分别强调了消费者对完成测量的偏好、解释测量目的的重要性、测量过程如何验证了他们的感受并为他们提供了一个自我反思、感知、建立信任的机会,以及测量过程中的透明度和赋权。这项研究就有效实施消费者评级措施的价值提出了建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信