Using recovery-focused PROMs in mental health care: what helps and what gets in the way? A scoping review.

IF 3.5 4区医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY

Journal of Mental Health Pub Date : 2026-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-12-31 DOI:10.1080/09638237.2025.2607985

Asha Zappa, Justin Newton Scanlan, Anne Honey, Nicola Hancock

{"title":"Using recovery-focused PROMs in mental health care: what helps and what gets in the way? A scoping review.","authors":"Asha Zappa, Justin Newton Scanlan, Anne Honey, Nicola Hancock","doi":"10.1080/09638237.2025.2607985","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Recovery-focused person/patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), are important for recovery-oriented services, but workers have been slow to embed them within practice. Little is known about factors that influence workers use of these measures.Aim: To synthesise peer reviewed literature regarding the enablers and barriers mental health workers report to using recovery-focused PROMs in practice.Methods: Five databases were searched. Data were extracted from publications meeting the inclusion criteria, tabulated, and presented graphically. A qualitative thematic analysis was also conducted.Results: Only six of 30 recovery-focused PROMs had any published work reporting staff experiences of using them. Aspects influencing PROM use included: organisational and structural factors; value alignment; tool psychometrics; perceived relevance to practice and people accessing service; whether staff deemed tools to be useful and meaningful, and ease of use and access.Conclusions: More work is needed to address worker needs if recovery-focused tools are to be used routinely to collaboratively support people to explore their own recovery-related strengths and priorities. Both tool specific aspects, and organisational structures, that can support or hinder workers to use these tools in routine and recovery-oriented ways.Prisma/prospero: The PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) was followed. Prospero does not accept protocols for scoping reviews.","PeriodicalId":48135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mental Health","volume":" ","pages":"127-139"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","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/10.1080/09638237.2025.2607985","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/12/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Recovery-focused person/patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), are important for recovery-oriented services, but workers have been slow to embed them within practice. Little is known about factors that influence workers use of these measures.

Aim: To synthesise peer reviewed literature regarding the enablers and barriers mental health workers report to using recovery-focused PROMs in practice.

Methods: Five databases were searched. Data were extracted from publications meeting the inclusion criteria, tabulated, and presented graphically. A qualitative thematic analysis was also conducted.

Results: Only six of 30 recovery-focused PROMs had any published work reporting staff experiences of using them. Aspects influencing PROM use included: organisational and structural factors; value alignment; tool psychometrics; perceived relevance to practice and people accessing service; whether staff deemed tools to be useful and meaningful, and ease of use and access.

Conclusions: More work is needed to address worker needs if recovery-focused tools are to be used routinely to collaboratively support people to explore their own recovery-related strengths and priorities. Both tool specific aspects, and organisational structures, that can support or hinder workers to use these tools in routine and recovery-oriented ways.

Prisma/prospero: The PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) was followed. Prospero does not accept protocols for scoping reviews.

查看原文本刊更多论文

在精神卫生保健中使用以康复为重点的prom：什么是帮助，什么是阻碍？范围审查。

背景：以康复为重点的个人/病人报告的结果测量（PROMs）对于康复为导向的服务很重要，但工作者在实践中嵌入它们的速度很慢。人们对影响工人使用这些措施的因素知之甚少。目的：综合同行评议文献关于精神卫生工作者报告在实践中使用以康复为重点的prom的促进因素和障碍。方法：检索5个数据库。数据从符合纳入标准的出版物中提取，制成表格，并以图形方式呈现。还进行了定性专题分析。结果：在30个以恢复为重点的prom中，只有6个发表了工作报告，报告了员工使用它们的经验。影响PROM使用的因素包括：组织和结构因素；值校准;心理测验学工具;感知到与实践和获得服务的人的相关性；员工是否认为工具有用和有意义，以及是否易于使用和获取。结论：如果要常规地使用以恢复为重点的工具来协同支持人们探索自己与恢复相关的优势和优先事项，则需要做更多的工作来满足工人的需求。工具特定的方面和组织结构，可以支持或阻碍工人在日常和恢复导向的方式中使用这些工具。Prisma/prospero：遵循了Prisma范围审查扩展（Prisma - scr）。普洛斯彼罗不接受范围审查协议。

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

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.