Experience of choice of treatment for adults with depression: a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative research.

IF 2.9 4区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Odette Megnin-Viggars,Katriona O'Donoghue,Stephen Pilling,Carolyn Chew-Graham
{"title":"Experience of choice of treatment for adults with depression: a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative research.","authors":"Odette Megnin-Viggars,Katriona O'Donoghue,Stephen Pilling,Carolyn Chew-Graham","doi":"10.1080/09638237.2024.2390369","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\r\nTreatment choices for depression are preference-sensitive (no \"single best option\"). However, factors or attributes that can enhance or inhibit patient choice have not been fully explored.\r\n\r\nAIMS\r\nTo synthesize the qualitative literature on facilitators and barriers to treatment choice, from the perspective of people with depression and healthcare practitioners.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nA systematic literature search identified eligible qualitative studies (Protocol registration no. CRD42019151352). Findings from 56 studies were meta-synthesized using a thematic analysis approach.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nOverarching facilitators to treatment choice that resonated with both patients and healthcare practitioners included: a trusting and respectful patient-practitioner relationship; information and guidance tailored to the individual and their preferred level of involvement in the decision-making process; eliciting and incorporating patient preferences and individual needs in order to find the best patient-treatment match. Prominent barriers to treatment choice that emerged were: limited time available to explore treatment options; inadequate mental health training, knowledge, skills, and experience; lack of psychological treatment services and waiting times; inflexibility of services.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nBy focusing on the factors identified, practitioners can facilitate patient participation in decision-making, which has the potential to improve engagement with treatment and outcomes for adults with depression.","PeriodicalId":48135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mental Health","volume":"15 1","pages":"1-18"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Mental Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09638237.2024.2390369","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND Treatment choices for depression are preference-sensitive (no "single best option"). However, factors or attributes that can enhance or inhibit patient choice have not been fully explored. AIMS To synthesize the qualitative literature on facilitators and barriers to treatment choice, from the perspective of people with depression and healthcare practitioners. METHODS A systematic literature search identified eligible qualitative studies (Protocol registration no. CRD42019151352). Findings from 56 studies were meta-synthesized using a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS Overarching facilitators to treatment choice that resonated with both patients and healthcare practitioners included: a trusting and respectful patient-practitioner relationship; information and guidance tailored to the individual and their preferred level of involvement in the decision-making process; eliciting and incorporating patient preferences and individual needs in order to find the best patient-treatment match. Prominent barriers to treatment choice that emerged were: limited time available to explore treatment options; inadequate mental health training, knowledge, skills, and experience; lack of psychological treatment services and waiting times; inflexibility of services. CONCLUSIONS By focusing on the factors identified, practitioners can facilitate patient participation in decision-making, which has the potential to improve engagement with treatment and outcomes for adults with depression.
成人抑郁症患者的治疗选择经验:定性研究的系统回顾和元综合。
背景抑郁症的治疗选择对偏好敏感(没有 "单一最佳选择")。目的从抑郁症患者和医疗从业人员的角度,综合分析有关治疗选择的促进因素和障碍的定性文献。方法通过系统性文献检索,确定了符合条件的定性研究(协议注册号:CRD42019151352)。结果在患者和医疗从业人员中引起共鸣的治疗选择的主要促进因素包括:信任和尊重患者与从业人员的关系;针对个人及其在决策过程中的首选参与程度量身定制的信息和指导;征询并纳入患者的偏好和个人需求,以找到最佳的患者-治疗匹配方案。治疗选择的主要障碍包括:探索治疗方案的时间有限;心理健康培训、知识、技能和经验不足;缺乏心理治疗服务和等待时间;服务缺乏灵活性。
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
Journal of Mental Health
Journal of Mental Health PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
3.00%
发文量
117
期刊介绍: The Journal of Mental Health is an international forum for the latest research in the mental health field. Reaching over 65 countries, the journal reports on the best in evidence-based practice around the world and provides a channel of communication between the many disciplines involved in mental health research and practice. The journal encourages multi-disciplinary research and welcomes contributions that have involved the users of mental health services. The international editorial team are committed to seeking out excellent work from a range of sources and theoretical perspectives. The journal not only reflects current good practice but also aims to influence policy by reporting on innovations that challenge traditional ways of working.
×
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