Defining dual diagnosis: a qualitative study of the views of health care workers

P. Staiger, Caroline Long, M. McCabe, L. Ricciardelli
{"title":"Defining dual diagnosis: a qualitative study of the views of health care workers","authors":"P. Staiger, Caroline Long, M. McCabe, L. Ricciardelli","doi":"10.1080/17523280802274985","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: 'Dual diagnosis' is the term of choice in many countries to describe clients with co-occurring mental health and alcohol and other drug (AOD) issues. However, it is not known if its meaning is consistently represented within and across health care services. This uncertainty has significant implications for referral, consultation and research. Aim: To obtain information about the way that different health care professionals understand the term 'dual diagnosis'. Method: Twenty-nine health care workers across five service types (medical, mental health, AOD, dual diagnosis and community health) in Victoria, Australia were interviewed about their understanding of the term 'dual diagnosis'. Results: The findings indicated that service providers working in AOD and Mental Health had a shared general understanding of what was meant by 'dual diagnosis', despite uncertainties about more specific inclusion criteria. In contrast, medical and community health staff lacked a similar shared understanding, and were more likely to recommend change, but offered no consensus on alternatives. Conclusion: The results indicate that while the term 'dual diagnosis' has value in efficiently directing attention to the complexity of treatment issues, health practitioners cannot assume it will convey the intended meaning outside mental health or AOD services. Clear articulation of the intended definition may be a necessary requirement in wider health care communication.","PeriodicalId":88592,"journal":{"name":"Mental health and substance use : dual diagnosis","volume":"15 1","pages":"194-204"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mental health and substance use : dual diagnosis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17523280802274985","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Background: 'Dual diagnosis' is the term of choice in many countries to describe clients with co-occurring mental health and alcohol and other drug (AOD) issues. However, it is not known if its meaning is consistently represented within and across health care services. This uncertainty has significant implications for referral, consultation and research. Aim: To obtain information about the way that different health care professionals understand the term 'dual diagnosis'. Method: Twenty-nine health care workers across five service types (medical, mental health, AOD, dual diagnosis and community health) in Victoria, Australia were interviewed about their understanding of the term 'dual diagnosis'. Results: The findings indicated that service providers working in AOD and Mental Health had a shared general understanding of what was meant by 'dual diagnosis', despite uncertainties about more specific inclusion criteria. In contrast, medical and community health staff lacked a similar shared understanding, and were more likely to recommend change, but offered no consensus on alternatives. Conclusion: The results indicate that while the term 'dual diagnosis' has value in efficiently directing attention to the complexity of treatment issues, health practitioners cannot assume it will convey the intended meaning outside mental health or AOD services. Clear articulation of the intended definition may be a necessary requirement in wider health care communication.
定义双重诊断:卫生保健工作者观点的定性研究
背景:“双重诊断”是许多国家用来描述同时出现精神健康和酒精及其他药物(AOD)问题的患者的术语。然而,尚不清楚其含义是否在卫生保健服务内部和各服务之间得到一致体现。这种不确定性对转诊、咨询和研究具有重大影响。目的:了解不同卫生保健专业人员对“双重诊断”的理解方式。方法:对澳大利亚维多利亚州五种服务类型(医学、心理健康、AOD、双重诊断和社区卫生)的29名卫生保健工作者进行了访谈,了解他们对“双重诊断”一词的理解。结果:研究结果表明,尽管对更具体的纳入标准存在不确定性,但在AOD和心理健康领域工作的服务提供者对“双重诊断”的含义有着共同的总体理解。相比之下,医疗和社区卫生工作人员缺乏类似的共同理解,更有可能建议改变,但在替代方案上没有达成共识。结论:结果表明,虽然“双重诊断”一词在有效地引导人们关注治疗问题的复杂性方面具有价值,但健康从业者不能假设它在精神健康或AOD服务之外会传达预期的含义。在更广泛的卫生保健沟通中,明确预期定义可能是必要的要求。
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