The meaning of 'acceptance' of a psychiatric diagnosis: qualitative study of illness narratives with review of the literature.

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Magali J de Rooy, Megan M Milota, Stefan M van Geelen, Léon C de Bruin, Floortje E Scheepers
{"title":"The meaning of 'acceptance' of a psychiatric diagnosis: qualitative study of illness narratives with review of the literature.","authors":"Magali J de Rooy, Megan M Milota, Stefan M van Geelen, Léon C de Bruin, Floortje E Scheepers","doi":"10.1192/bjo.2025.10810","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although diagnosis acceptance is frequently discussed in psychiatric practice and research, both components - psychiatric diagnoses and the act of accepting them - are inherently unclear.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":9038,"journal":{"name":"BJPsych Open","volume":"11 5","pages":"e194"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12451724/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJPsych Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1192/bjo.2025.10810","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Although diagnosis acceptance is frequently discussed in psychiatric practice and research, both components - psychiatric diagnoses and the act of accepting them - are inherently unclear.

Aims: 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.

Method: 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.

Results: 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.

Conclusions: 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.

精神病诊断的“接受”的意义:疾病叙事的定性研究与文献回顾。
背景:虽然在精神病学实践和研究中经常讨论诊断的接受性,但这两个组成部分——精神病学诊断和接受它们的行为——本质上是不明确的。目的:本研究旨在评估现有的诊断接受理论概念与患者经验的一致性,并探讨与诊断接受相关的主题。方法:对30例(前)精神病患者的疾病叙述进行迭代主题分析。分析通过三个阶段进行:(a)审查总体叙述和对诊断的态度的记录,(b)使用叙述摘要模板提取详细数据,(c)精炼和比较不同叙述的主题。结果:现有的接受理论没有充分捕捉到叙事中反映的生活经历。对诊断的态度是多方面的,随着时间的推移而波动,并且经常使用“接受”以外的术语来描述。与会者强调了在不被诊断定义的情况下分享他们的故事的重要性,并将DSM-5分类与更广泛的诊断术语合并,强调了精神病学结构交流中的挑战。诊断上的分歧并不一定会阻碍治疗关系,这强调了合作比共识更重要。结论:鉴于现有接受理论的实际应用有限,以及我们对精神病学诊断态度相关的背景因素的研究结果,诊断接受作为积极结果的独立目标的必要性应该受到质疑。而不是强加分类,创造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方法来更好地理解和支持患者,从而促进互惠的、以患者为中心的精神保健。
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
BJPsych Open
BJPsych Open Medicine-Psychiatry and Mental Health
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
3.70%
发文量
610
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Announcing the launch of BJPsych Open, an exciting new open access online journal for the publication of all methodologically sound research in all fields of psychiatry and disciplines related to mental health. BJPsych Open will maintain the highest scientific, peer review, and ethical standards of the BJPsych, ensure rapid publication for authors whilst sharing research with no cost to the reader in the spirit of maximising dissemination and public engagement. Cascade submission from BJPsych to BJPsych Open is a new option for authors whose first priority is rapid online publication with the prestigious BJPsych brand. Authors will also retain copyright to their works under a creative commons license.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信