Clinician views on best practice community care for people with complex emotional needs and how it can be achieved: a qualitative study.
Journal
BMC psychiatry
ISSN: 1471-244X
Titre abrégé: BMC Psychiatry
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968559
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 01 2022
28 01 2022
Historique:
received:
24
06
2021
accepted:
14
01
2022
entrez:
29
1
2022
pubmed:
30
1
2022
medline:
12
4
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Individuals with Complex Emotional Needs (CEN) services, a working description to refer to the needs experienced by people who may have been diagnosed with a "personality disorder", face premature mortality, high rates of co-morbidity, service user and treatment costs. Service provision for this population is recurrently identified as needing to be transformed: there are serious concerns about quality, accessibility, fragmentation of the service system and the stigma and therapeutic pessimism service users encounter. Understanding clinician perspectives is vital for service transformation, as their views and experiences shed light on potential barriers to achieving good care, and how these might be overcome. In this study, we aimed to explore these views. We used a qualitative interview design. A total of fifty participants from a range of professions across specialist and generic community mental health services across England who provide care to people with CEN took part in six focus groups and sixteen one-to-one interviews. We analysed the data using a thematic approach. Main themes were: 1) Acknowledging the heterogeneity of needs: the need for a person-centred care approach and flexibility when working with CEN, 2) 'Still a diagnosis of exclusion': Exploring the healthcare provider-level barriers to providing care, and 3) Understanding the exclusionary culture: exploring the system-based barriers to providing care for CEN. Across these themes, staff highlighted in particular the need for care that was person-centred, relational, empathic, and trauma informed. Major barriers to achieving this are stigmatising attitudes and behaviour towards people with CEN, especially in generic mental health services, lack of development of coherent service systems offering clear long-term pathways and ready access to high quality treatment, and lack of well-developed structures for staff training and support. Overall, the findings point towards clinician views as generally congruent with those of service users, reinforcing the need for priorities towards systemwide change to ensure that best practice care is provided for people with CEN. Particularly prominent is the need to put in place systemwide training and support for clinicians working with CEN, encompassing generic and specialist services, and to challenge the stigma still experienced throughout the system. Staff working with this service user group report that delivering best practice care requires services to be flexible, integrated, and sustainably funded, and for staff to be supported through ongoing training and supervision.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Individuals with Complex Emotional Needs (CEN) services, a working description to refer to the needs experienced by people who may have been diagnosed with a "personality disorder", face premature mortality, high rates of co-morbidity, service user and treatment costs. Service provision for this population is recurrently identified as needing to be transformed: there are serious concerns about quality, accessibility, fragmentation of the service system and the stigma and therapeutic pessimism service users encounter. Understanding clinician perspectives is vital for service transformation, as their views and experiences shed light on potential barriers to achieving good care, and how these might be overcome. In this study, we aimed to explore these views.
METHODS
We used a qualitative interview design. A total of fifty participants from a range of professions across specialist and generic community mental health services across England who provide care to people with CEN took part in six focus groups and sixteen one-to-one interviews. We analysed the data using a thematic approach.
FINDINGS
Main themes were: 1) Acknowledging the heterogeneity of needs: the need for a person-centred care approach and flexibility when working with CEN, 2) 'Still a diagnosis of exclusion': Exploring the healthcare provider-level barriers to providing care, and 3) Understanding the exclusionary culture: exploring the system-based barriers to providing care for CEN. Across these themes, staff highlighted in particular the need for care that was person-centred, relational, empathic, and trauma informed. Major barriers to achieving this are stigmatising attitudes and behaviour towards people with CEN, especially in generic mental health services, lack of development of coherent service systems offering clear long-term pathways and ready access to high quality treatment, and lack of well-developed structures for staff training and support.
DISCUSSION
Overall, the findings point towards clinician views as generally congruent with those of service users, reinforcing the need for priorities towards systemwide change to ensure that best practice care is provided for people with CEN. Particularly prominent is the need to put in place systemwide training and support for clinicians working with CEN, encompassing generic and specialist services, and to challenge the stigma still experienced throughout the system.
CONCLUSIONS
Staff working with this service user group report that delivering best practice care requires services to be flexible, integrated, and sustainably funded, and for staff to be supported through ongoing training and supervision.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35090418
doi: 10.1186/s12888-022-03711-x
pii: 10.1186/s12888-022-03711-x
pmc: PMC8796601
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
72Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
PLoS One. 2017 Mar 1;12(3):e0171592
pubmed: 28249032
J Ment Health. 2021 Oct;30(5):619-633
pubmed: 31099717
J Clin Psychiatry. 2008 Feb;69(2):259-65
pubmed: 18363454
PLoS One. 2021 Apr 29;16(4):e0248316
pubmed: 33914750
PLoS One. 2014 Jul 07;9(7):e100979
pubmed: 25000503
Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2018 Dec;41(4):583-593
pubmed: 30447726
Personal Ment Health. 2018 Nov;12(4):309-320
pubmed: 30094955
Eur Psychiatry. 2007 Sep;22(6):354-61
pubmed: 17544636
World Psychiatry. 2017 Jun;16(2):215-216
pubmed: 28498598
J Ment Health. 2018 Oct;27(5):383-387
pubmed: 30345848
Br J Psychiatry. 2006 May;188:423-31
pubmed: 16648528
Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2020 Oct;29(5):972-981
pubmed: 32426937
J Ment Health. 2019 Mar 12;:1-21
pubmed: 30862201
BJPsych Bull. 2017 Oct;41(5):247-253
pubmed: 29018548
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 May 4;5:CD012955
pubmed: 32368793
PLoS One. 2014 Sep 29;9(9):e107748
pubmed: 25265185