The impact of working as a peer worker in mental health services: a longitudinal mixed methods study.
Burnout
Community mental health
Employment
Interdisciplinary team working
Job satisfaction
Mental health services
Mixed methods research
Peer support
Psychiatric inpatient care
Wellbeing
Journal
BMC psychiatry
ISSN: 1471-244X
Titre abrégé: BMC Psychiatry
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968559
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 06 2022
01 06 2022
Historique:
received:
11
03
2022
accepted:
13
05
2022
entrez:
1
6
2022
pubmed:
2
6
2022
medline:
7
6
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Peer workers are increasingly employed in mental health services to use their own experiences of mental distress in supporting others with similar experiences. While evidence is emerging of the benefits of peer support for people using services, the impact on peer workers is less clear. There is a lack of research that takes a longitudinal approach to exploring impact on both employment outcomes for peer workers, and their experiences of working in the peer worker role. In a longitudinal mixed methods study, 32 peer workers providing peer support for discharge from inpatient to community mental health care - as part of a randomised controlled trial - undertook in-depth qualitative interviews conducted by service user researchers, and completed measures of wellbeing, burnout, job satisfaction and multi-disciplinary team working after completing training, and four and 12 months into the role. Questionnaire data were summarised and compared to outcomes for relevant population norms, and changes in outcomes were analysed using paired t-tests. Thematic analysis and interpretive workshops involving service user researchers were used to analysis interview transcripts. A critical interpretive synthesis approach was used to synthesise analyses of both datasets. For the duration of the study, all questionnaire outcomes were comparable with population norms for health professionals or for the general population. There were small-to-medium decreases in wellbeing and aspects of job satisfaction, and increase in burnout after 4 months, but these changes were largely not maintained at 12 months. Peer workers felt valued, empowered and connected in the role, but could find it challenging to adjust to the demands of the job after initial optimism. Supervision and being part of a standalone peer worker team was supportive, although communication with clinical teams could be improved. Peer workers seem no more likely to experience negative impacts of working than other healthcare professionals but should be well supported as they settle into post, provided with in-work training and support around job insecurity. Research is needed to optimise working arrangements for peer workers alongside clinical teams.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Peer workers are increasingly employed in mental health services to use their own experiences of mental distress in supporting others with similar experiences. While evidence is emerging of the benefits of peer support for people using services, the impact on peer workers is less clear. There is a lack of research that takes a longitudinal approach to exploring impact on both employment outcomes for peer workers, and their experiences of working in the peer worker role.
METHODS
In a longitudinal mixed methods study, 32 peer workers providing peer support for discharge from inpatient to community mental health care - as part of a randomised controlled trial - undertook in-depth qualitative interviews conducted by service user researchers, and completed measures of wellbeing, burnout, job satisfaction and multi-disciplinary team working after completing training, and four and 12 months into the role. Questionnaire data were summarised and compared to outcomes for relevant population norms, and changes in outcomes were analysed using paired t-tests. Thematic analysis and interpretive workshops involving service user researchers were used to analysis interview transcripts. A critical interpretive synthesis approach was used to synthesise analyses of both datasets.
RESULTS
For the duration of the study, all questionnaire outcomes were comparable with population norms for health professionals or for the general population. There were small-to-medium decreases in wellbeing and aspects of job satisfaction, and increase in burnout after 4 months, but these changes were largely not maintained at 12 months. Peer workers felt valued, empowered and connected in the role, but could find it challenging to adjust to the demands of the job after initial optimism. Supervision and being part of a standalone peer worker team was supportive, although communication with clinical teams could be improved.
CONCLUSIONS
Peer workers seem no more likely to experience negative impacts of working than other healthcare professionals but should be well supported as they settle into post, provided with in-work training and support around job insecurity. Research is needed to optimise working arrangements for peer workers alongside clinical teams.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35650562
doi: 10.1186/s12888-022-03999-9
pii: 10.1186/s12888-022-03999-9
pmc: PMC9158348
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
373Subventions
Organisme : Department of Health
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
BMC Psychiatry. 2020 Nov 11;20(1):534
pubmed: 33176729
Community Ment Health J. 2015 May;51(4):424-36
pubmed: 25724917
Annu Rev Psychol. 2001;52:397-422
pubmed: 11148311
Int J Nurs Stud. 2016 Aug;60:234-50
pubmed: 27297384
Med Care. 2004 May;42(5):472-81
pubmed: 15083108
Qual Health Res. 2012 Aug;22(8):1126-37
pubmed: 22673090
J Ment Health. 2011 Aug;20(4):392-411
pubmed: 21770786
Int J Soc Psychiatry. 2020 May;66(3):263-269
pubmed: 32046565
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2007 Nov 27;5:63
pubmed: 18042300
Medicine (Baltimore). 2020 Mar;99(10):e19192
pubmed: 32150057
Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2018 Apr;27(2):662-671
pubmed: 28548455
Psychiatr Serv. 2018 Sep 1;69(9):961-977
pubmed: 29962310
Annu Rev Psychol. 2001;52:141-66
pubmed: 11148302
Qual Health Res. 2012 Mar;22(3):304-19
pubmed: 21900694
Community Ment Health J. 2018 Feb;54(2):127-137
pubmed: 28466237
Healthc Manage Forum. 2019 Mar;32(2):68-72
pubmed: 30744437
Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2016 Sep;39(3):211-21
pubmed: 27618458
Int J Soc Psychiatry. 2014 May;60(3):211-8
pubmed: 23539546
J Interprof Care. 2020 Jan-Feb;34(1):107-115
pubmed: 31106671
BMC Health Serv Res. 2013 May 24;13:188
pubmed: 23705767
Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2013 Mar;36(1):28-34
pubmed: 23477647
J Psychosoc Nurs Ment Health Serv. 2014 Jan;52(1):31-40
pubmed: 24305905
Eur Psychiatry. 2018 Sep;53:74-99
pubmed: 29957371
J Adv Nurs. 1993 Jun;18(6):992-1004
pubmed: 8320397
Int J Nurs Stud. 2009 Jul;46(7):894-902
pubmed: 19362309
Adm Policy Ment Health. 2022 Jul;49(4):596-612
pubmed: 35018509
Int J Soc Psychiatry. 1996 Summer;42(2):102-11
pubmed: 8811394
Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2021 Mar;44(1):93-98
pubmed: 32191104
BMC Res Notes. 2021 Aug 21;14(1):320
pubmed: 34419155
J Adv Nurs. 1993 Jan;18(1):127-36
pubmed: 8429157
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2020 Mar;55(3):285-293
pubmed: 31177310
PLoS One. 2017 Oct 4;12(10):e0185781
pubmed: 28977041
Australas Psychiatry. 2008 Oct;16(5):348-53
pubmed: 18608147
Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2012 Spring;35(4):337-40
pubmed: 22491374
Adm Policy Ment Health. 2007 May;34(3):293-306
pubmed: 17340184
Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci. 2015 Oct;24(5):435-45
pubmed: 24992284
Sociol Health Illn. 2019 Sep;41(7):1305-1322
pubmed: 31012987
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017 Dec 28;17(1):175
pubmed: 29281974
BMC Psychiatry. 2020 Jun 1;20(1):270
pubmed: 32487169
Psychiatr Serv. 2016 Oct 1;67(10):1109-1115
pubmed: 27247169
Community Ment Health J. 2016 Oct;52(7):767-74
pubmed: 26620369
J Ment Health. 2019 Aug;28(4):341-344
pubmed: 31070066
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2010 Jan;39(1):139-54
pubmed: 19783398
Psychiatr Serv. 2014 May 1;65(5):678-80
pubmed: 24535565