成人社区心理健康危机护理的背景、机制和结果的解释:MH-CREST现实主义证据综合。

Nicola Clibbens, John Baker, Andrew Booth, Kathryn Berzins, Michael C Ashman, Leila Sharda, Jill Thompson, Sarah Kendal, Scott Weich
{"title":"成人社区心理健康危机护理的背景、机制和结果的解释:MH-CREST现实主义证据综合。","authors":"Nicola Clibbens,&nbsp;John Baker,&nbsp;Andrew Booth,&nbsp;Kathryn Berzins,&nbsp;Michael C Ashman,&nbsp;Leila Sharda,&nbsp;Jill Thompson,&nbsp;Sarah Kendal,&nbsp;Scott Weich","doi":"10.3310/TWKK5110","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mental health crises cause significant disruption to individuals and families and can be life-threatening. The large number of community crisis services operating in an inter-agency landscape complicates access to help. It is unclear which underpinning mechanisms of crisis care work, for whom and in which circumstances.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>The aim was to identify mechanisms to explain how, for whom and in what circumstances adult community crisis services work.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The objectives were to develop, test and synthesise programme theories via (1) stakeholder expertise and current evidence; (2) a context, intervention, mechanism and outcome framework; (3) consultation with experts; (4) development of pen portraits; (5) synthesis and refinement of programme theories, including mid-range theory; and (6) identification and dissemination of mechanisms needed to trigger desired context-specific crisis outcomes.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This study is a realist evidence synthesis, comprising (1) identification of initial programme theories; (2) prioritisation, testing and refinement of programme theories; (3) focused realist reviews of prioritised initial programme theories; and (4) synthesis to mid-range theory.</p><p><strong>Main outcome: </strong>The main outcome was to explain context, mechanisms and outcomes in adult community mental health crisis care.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Data were sourced via academic and grey literature searches, expert stakeholder group consultations and 20 individual realist interviews with experts.</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>A realist evidence synthesis with primary data was conducted to test and refine three initial programme theories: (1) urgent and accessible crisis care, (2) compassionate and therapeutic crisis care and (3) inter-agency working.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Community crisis services operate best within an inter-agency system. This requires compassionate leadership and shared values that enable staff to be supported; retain their compassion; and, in turn, facilitate compassionate interventions for people in crisis. The complex interface between agencies is best managed through greater clarity at the boundaries of services, making referral and transition seamless and timely. This would facilitate ease of access and guaranteed responses that are trusted by the communities they serve.</p><p><strong>Strengths and limitations: </strong>Strengths include the identification of mechanisms for effective inter-agency community crisis care and meaningful stakeholder consultation that grounded the theories in real-life experience. Limitations include the evidence being heavily weighted towards England and the review scope excluding full analysis of ethnic and cultural diversity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Multiple interpretations of crises and diverse population needs present challenges for improving the complex pathways to help in a crisis. Inter-agency working requires clear policy guidance with local commissioning. Seamless transitions between services generate trust through guaranteed responses and ease of navigation. This is best achieved where there is inter-agency affiliation that supports co-production. Compassionate leaders engender staff trust, and outcomes for people in crisis improve when staff are supported to retain their compassion.</p><p><strong>Future work: </strong>Further work might explore inter-agency models of crisis delivery, particularly in rural communities. Future work could focus on evaluating outcomes across crisis care provider agencies and include evaluation of individual, as well as service-level, outcomes. The implementation and effect of mental health triage could be explored further, including via telehealth. Barriers to access for marginalised populations warrant a specific focus in future research.</p><p><strong>Study registration: </strong>The study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019141680.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in <i>Health and Social Care Delivery Research</i>; Vol. 11, No. 15. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.</p>","PeriodicalId":73204,"journal":{"name":"Health and social care delivery research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Explanation of context, mechanisms and outcomes in adult community mental health crisis care: the MH-CREST realist evidence synthesis.\",\"authors\":\"Nicola Clibbens,&nbsp;John Baker,&nbsp;Andrew Booth,&nbsp;Kathryn Berzins,&nbsp;Michael C Ashman,&nbsp;Leila Sharda,&nbsp;Jill Thompson,&nbsp;Sarah Kendal,&nbsp;Scott Weich\",\"doi\":\"10.3310/TWKK5110\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mental health crises cause significant disruption to individuals and families and can be life-threatening. The large number of community crisis services operating in an inter-agency landscape complicates access to help. It is unclear which underpinning mechanisms of crisis care work, for whom and in which circumstances.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>The aim was to identify mechanisms to explain how, for whom and in what circumstances adult community crisis services work.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The objectives were to develop, test and synthesise programme theories via (1) stakeholder expertise and current evidence; (2) a context, intervention, mechanism and outcome framework; (3) consultation with experts; (4) development of pen portraits; (5) synthesis and refinement of programme theories, including mid-range theory; and (6) identification and dissemination of mechanisms needed to trigger desired context-specific crisis outcomes.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This study is a realist evidence synthesis, comprising (1) identification of initial programme theories; (2) prioritisation, testing and refinement of programme theories; (3) focused realist reviews of prioritised initial programme theories; and (4) synthesis to mid-range theory.</p><p><strong>Main outcome: </strong>The main outcome was to explain context, mechanisms and outcomes in adult community mental health crisis care.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Data were sourced via academic and grey literature searches, expert stakeholder group consultations and 20 individual realist interviews with experts.</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>A realist evidence synthesis with primary data was conducted to test and refine three initial programme theories: (1) urgent and accessible crisis care, (2) compassionate and therapeutic crisis care and (3) inter-agency working.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Community crisis services operate best within an inter-agency system. This requires compassionate leadership and shared values that enable staff to be supported; retain their compassion; and, in turn, facilitate compassionate interventions for people in crisis. The complex interface between agencies is best managed through greater clarity at the boundaries of services, making referral and transition seamless and timely. This would facilitate ease of access and guaranteed responses that are trusted by the communities they serve.</p><p><strong>Strengths and limitations: </strong>Strengths include the identification of mechanisms for effective inter-agency community crisis care and meaningful stakeholder consultation that grounded the theories in real-life experience. Limitations include the evidence being heavily weighted towards England and the review scope excluding full analysis of ethnic and cultural diversity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Multiple interpretations of crises and diverse population needs present challenges for improving the complex pathways to help in a crisis. Inter-agency working requires clear policy guidance with local commissioning. Seamless transitions between services generate trust through guaranteed responses and ease of navigation. This is best achieved where there is inter-agency affiliation that supports co-production. Compassionate leaders engender staff trust, and outcomes for people in crisis improve when staff are supported to retain their compassion.</p><p><strong>Future work: </strong>Further work might explore inter-agency models of crisis delivery, particularly in rural communities. Future work could focus on evaluating outcomes across crisis care provider agencies and include evaluation of individual, as well as service-level, outcomes. The implementation and effect of mental health triage could be explored further, including via telehealth. Barriers to access for marginalised populations warrant a specific focus in future research.</p><p><strong>Study registration: </strong>The study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019141680.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in <i>Health and Social Care Delivery Research</i>; Vol. 11, No. 15. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73204,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health and social care delivery research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health and social care delivery research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3310/TWKK5110\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health and social care delivery research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/TWKK5110","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:心理健康危机会对个人和家庭造成重大干扰,并可能危及生命。在机构间环境中运作的大量社区危机服务使获得帮助变得复杂。目前尚不清楚危机护理的哪些基础机制、对谁有效以及在何种情况下有效。目的:目的是确定解释成人社区危机服务如何、为谁以及在什么情况下工作的机制。目标:目标是通过(1)利益相关者的专业知识和当前证据,开发、测试和综合方案理论;(2) 背景、干预、机制和成果框架;(3) 与专家协商;(4) 钢笔肖像画的发展;(5) 综合和完善方案理论,包括中档理论;以及(6)确定和传播所需机制,以触发预期的针对具体情况的危机结果。设计:本研究是一个现实主义的证据综合,包括(1)初步程序理论的识别;(2) 对方案理论进行优先排序、测试和完善;(3) 对优先的初始计划理论进行有针对性的现实主义审查;以及(4)中端理论的综合。主要结果:主要结果是解释成人社区心理健康危机护理的背景、机制和结果。数据来源:数据来源于学术和灰色文献检索、专家利益相关者小组咨询和20次专家个人现实主义访谈。审查方法:对原始数据进行了现实主义证据综合,以测试和完善三个初始计划理论:(1)紧急和可获得的危机护理,(2)同情和治疗性危机护理,以及(3)机构间工作。结果:社区危机服务在机构间系统中运作得最好。这需要富有同情心的领导和共同的价值观,使工作人员能够得到支持;保持他们的同情心;反过来,为处于危机中的人们提供富有同情心的干预。机构之间的复杂接口最好通过更明确的服务边界来管理,使转诊和过渡无缝及时。这将有助于方便访问,并保证他们所服务的社区信任的响应。优势和局限性:优势包括确定有效的机构间社区危机护理机制和有意义的利益相关者咨询,这些机制将理论建立在现实经验的基础上。局限性包括证据严重偏向英格兰,审查范围不包括对种族和文化多样性的全面分析。结论:对危机的多种解释和不同的人口需求对改善危机中的复杂援助途径提出了挑战。机构间工作需要有明确的政策指导和当地委托。服务之间的无缝转换通过有保证的响应和易于导航来产生信任。这在有支持联合制作的机构间附属关系的情况下是最好的。富有同情心的领导者会产生员工的信任,当员工得到支持以保持同情心时,危机中的人们的结果会得到改善。未来的工作:进一步的工作可能会探索机构间危机应对模式,特别是在农村社区。未来的工作可能侧重于评估危机护理机构的结果,包括评估个人以及服务水平的结果。可以进一步探讨心理健康分诊的实施和效果,包括通过远程医疗。边缘化人群的获取障碍需要在未来的研究中给予特别关注。研究注册:该研究注册为PROSPERO CRD42019141680。资助:该项目由国家卫生与护理研究所(NIHR)卫生与社会护理提供研究计划资助,并将在《卫生与社会保健提供研究》上全文发表;第11卷第15期。有关更多项目信息,请访问NIHR期刊图书馆网站。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Explanation of context, mechanisms and outcomes in adult community mental health crisis care: the MH-CREST realist evidence synthesis.

Background: Mental health crises cause significant disruption to individuals and families and can be life-threatening. The large number of community crisis services operating in an inter-agency landscape complicates access to help. It is unclear which underpinning mechanisms of crisis care work, for whom and in which circumstances.

Aim: The aim was to identify mechanisms to explain how, for whom and in what circumstances adult community crisis services work.

Objectives: The objectives were to develop, test and synthesise programme theories via (1) stakeholder expertise and current evidence; (2) a context, intervention, mechanism and outcome framework; (3) consultation with experts; (4) development of pen portraits; (5) synthesis and refinement of programme theories, including mid-range theory; and (6) identification and dissemination of mechanisms needed to trigger desired context-specific crisis outcomes.

Design: This study is a realist evidence synthesis, comprising (1) identification of initial programme theories; (2) prioritisation, testing and refinement of programme theories; (3) focused realist reviews of prioritised initial programme theories; and (4) synthesis to mid-range theory.

Main outcome: The main outcome was to explain context, mechanisms and outcomes in adult community mental health crisis care.

Data sources: Data were sourced via academic and grey literature searches, expert stakeholder group consultations and 20 individual realist interviews with experts.

Review methods: A realist evidence synthesis with primary data was conducted to test and refine three initial programme theories: (1) urgent and accessible crisis care, (2) compassionate and therapeutic crisis care and (3) inter-agency working.

Results: Community crisis services operate best within an inter-agency system. This requires compassionate leadership and shared values that enable staff to be supported; retain their compassion; and, in turn, facilitate compassionate interventions for people in crisis. The complex interface between agencies is best managed through greater clarity at the boundaries of services, making referral and transition seamless and timely. This would facilitate ease of access and guaranteed responses that are trusted by the communities they serve.

Strengths and limitations: Strengths include the identification of mechanisms for effective inter-agency community crisis care and meaningful stakeholder consultation that grounded the theories in real-life experience. Limitations include the evidence being heavily weighted towards England and the review scope excluding full analysis of ethnic and cultural diversity.

Conclusions: Multiple interpretations of crises and diverse population needs present challenges for improving the complex pathways to help in a crisis. Inter-agency working requires clear policy guidance with local commissioning. Seamless transitions between services generate trust through guaranteed responses and ease of navigation. This is best achieved where there is inter-agency affiliation that supports co-production. Compassionate leaders engender staff trust, and outcomes for people in crisis improve when staff are supported to retain their compassion.

Future work: Further work might explore inter-agency models of crisis delivery, particularly in rural communities. Future work could focus on evaluating outcomes across crisis care provider agencies and include evaluation of individual, as well as service-level, outcomes. The implementation and effect of mental health triage could be explored further, including via telehealth. Barriers to access for marginalised populations warrant a specific focus in future research.

Study registration: The study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019141680.

Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 11, No. 15. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
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