Open Dialogue compared to treatment as usual for adults experiencing a mental health crisis: Protocol for the ODDESSI multi-site cluster randomised controlled trial

Assessing the quality of life of schizophrenia patients and their family caregivers in a Romanian sample: the role of clinical, sociocultural, and demographic factors

Background

Schizophrenia is a chronic mental health disorder significantly impacting the Quality of Life (QOL) of both patients and their family caregivers. In Romania, approximately 193,000 individuals are affected by schizophrenia, with most relying on non-professional family caregivers. These caregivers face substantial psychological, physical, financial, and social challenges, which remain understudied and often overlooked by health policymakers. This research employs a biopsychosocial framework to explore the interconnected clinical, cognitive, and sociocultural factors influencing the QOL of schizophrenia patients and their caregivers.

Objectives

This study aims to assess the QOL of schizophrenia patients and their family caregivers in a Romanian sample, focusing on key determinants such as social support, financial stressors, and caregiving burden, to provide insights for interventions and possibly policy development.

Methods

This cross-sectional study included 156 individuals: 52 schizophrenia patient-family caregiver pairs (n = 104) and a control group of 52 participants recruited from an occupational health clinic. The control group was matched with the patient-caregiver pairs on demographic characteristics, including age, gender, education, and socioeconomic status. Controls were selected to reflect similar socioeconomic and health-related challenges but excluded individuals with a history of mental health disorders. Schizophrenia diagnoses were established using ICD-10 criteria (F20.0-9). QOL was assessed using the Heinrichs-Carpenter Quality of Life Scale (QLS) exclusively for schizophrenia patients, while the WHOQOL-BREF was administered to all participants to ensure comparability. Additional assessments included the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) for depressive symptoms, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) for cognitive functioning, the Eppendorf Schizophrenia Inventory (ESI) for caregiver psychopathology, and the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scale to measure functional status.

Results

Caregivers exhibited elevated depressive symptoms, with a mean Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) score of 25 (≥20 indicates moderate depression), highlighting the significant psychological burden associated with caregiving. In contrast, the control group had a mean BDI score of 15, below the clinical threshold. Additionally, caregivers demonstrated reduced cognitive functioning, with a mean Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score of 24, compared to 28 in the control group (<26 suggests mild cognitive impairment). These findings underscore the biopsychosocial stressors faced by caregivers.

Conclusions

This study highlights the significant cognitive, psychological, and sociocultural burdens associated with schizophrenia for patients and caregivers, advancing understanding of these challenges in a Romanian context. By emphasizing the need for integrated, culturally sensitive care models, our findings offer actionable insights to inform national and international mental health policies and future research on caregiver support and QOL enhancement.

Perspective matters in recovery: the views of persons with severe mental illness, family and mental health professionals on collaboration during recovery, a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Recovery from severe mental illness, including psychosis has been described as a personal and unique process, but it rarely is a journey undertaken without profound influences of significant others (family, mental health professionals). Diverging perspectives between persons with severe mental illness, family and professionals are frequent during the recovery process, notably in psychotic disorders. We aimed to explore processes of collaboration during recovery, to inform recovery supporting practices.

METHODS

Current qualitative study had a participatory design and was set within long-term mental healthcare for severe mental illness. We conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with persons with severe mental illness (most had a history of psychosis), family and professionals on their mutual contact during recovery. Using reflexive thematic analysis, we developed themes representing processes of collaboration during recovery.

RESULTS

We described roles persons with severe mental illness, family and professionals attribute to each other in mutually influential terms of unconditional and meaningful contact (which takes time to establish) and problem-oriented aspects. Secondly, experienced differences over problem definition, "needing help" and consequently over the role parties attribute to one another, may result in negative interactions, in the area of having expectations; (not) informing; (not) having agency to change; experiencing (dis)agreement or struggle.

CONCLUSIONS

unconditional, meaningful contact and knowing each other's perspective are important to fruitful interaction in a triad when perspectives on mental health problems diverge. Relationally centered and process oriented care with continuity of family and professionals involved are needed to advance recovery in severe mental illness, especially psychosis.

Evaluating Open Dialogue in Italian mental health services: evidence from a multisite prospective cohort study

Objective

This longitudinal study aimed to quantitatively document and evaluate the implementation and outcomes of the Open Dialogue (OD) approach within Italian Mental Health Departments (MHDs), focusing on the ratings of OD-network meetings by patients and their families and assessing the clinical outcomes over a span of 12 months.

Results

Over the course of the study, 58 patients participated in 517 OD-network meetings, demonstrating a high level of satisfaction with the care received, as evidenced by the Session Rating Scale (SRS) and Outcome Rating Scale (ORS). Clinically, significant improvements were observed in the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF), Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (CORE-OM), and the Lubben Social Network Scale (LSNS), indicating enhanced psychological and social functioning. The SRS scores showed that satisfaction with the meetings increased over time, while the ORS indicated that both patients and their social networks perceived gradual improvements throughout the therapy.

Conclusion

The OD approach within Italian MHDs was successfully implemented and well-received by patients and their social networks, yielding significant clinical improvements. These findings suggest the feasibility and effectiveness of integrating the OD model into the Italian public mental health system, supporting its potential for broader application in diverse healthcare settings. The study highlights the importance of continuous engagement and evaluation to maintain high standards of practice and suggests that OD can be a valuable addition to existing mental health care practices, promoting recovery through inclusive, dialogue-based interventions.

Becoming an Open Dialogue practitioner: a qualitative study of practitioners' training experiences and transitioning to practice

Introduction

In the context of transforming mental healthcare towards more personalised and recovery-oriented models, Open Dialogue has attracted significant international interest. Open Dialogue proposes a way of organising services and delivering care that supports an immediate response to crisis, relational continuity of care, a social network approach and the empowerment of networks through shared decision-making and a flattened hierarchy. The ODDESSI trial currently being conducted in the UK is assessing the model's clinical and cost-effectiveness. Practitioners who delivered the approach within the trial undertook a one-year Open Dialogue foundation training programme, however little is known about their training experiences. This study aimed to explore practitioners' experiences of receiving the training and transitioning to dialogic practice.

Methods

Individual, joint and focus group interviews with 32 Open Dialogue practitioners were conducted. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the transcripts and transformational learning theory informed the interpretation of the findings.

Results

Two themes further divided in subthemes were generated from the data: (1) experiences and impact of formal training and (2) becoming an Open Dialogue practitioner as an ongoing learning process beyond formal training: barriers and facilitators.

Discussion

The one-year Open Dialogue foundation training was a transformative experience for participants due to its emphasis on self-work and its impact on a personal level. Practitioners felt adequately prepared by their training for dialogic practice, yet becoming an OD practitioner was seen as a continual process extending beyond formal training, necessitating ongoing engagement with the approach and organisational support. However, the commitment of participants to deliver optimal dialogic care was occasionally impeded by organisational constraints, resource limitations, and often having to concurrently deliver conventional care alongside Open Dialogue.

Introducing Compassionate and Relational Enquiry (CARE): A Three-Day Training for Mental Health Clinicians on Relational Ways of Working

Research shows that, in mental healthcare, empathy and active listening skills play a fundamental role in the therapeutic relationship. Despite this, clinicians receive little training in cultivating these qualities, and there is a dearth of training in therapeutic relationships and relational care in this field more generally. In response to this paucity of training, a new intensive three-day training programme has been developed called Compassionate and Relational Enquiry (CARE). The CARE training programme has recently been delivered to a number of mental health teams in different boroughs of an NHS Trust and has undergone several rounds of redevelopment. This paper outlines the CARE training programme's objectives and mode of delivery, and subsequently presents questionnaire results from recent CARE trainees regarding their experience of the nature and utility of the training. Four main themes emerged from responses to the question of the utility of the training, these were 'A shift towards more person-centred care', 'Strengthens the therapeutic relationship', 'Facilitates more collaborative care with patients and their families' and 'Development of new skills and therapeutic techniques'. The paper concludes by discussing the potential of this training to help forge a substantial shift in the culture of mental health services in a systemic way.

Open Dialogue services around the world: a scoping survey exploring organizational characteristics in the implementation of the Open Dialogue approach in mental health services

Objective

This cross-sectional study investigates the characteristics and practices of mental health care services implementing Open Dialogue (OD) globally.

Methods

A structured questionnaire including a self-assessment scale to measure teams' adherence to Open Dialogue principles was developed. Data were collected from OD teams in various countries. Confirmatory Composite Analysis was employed to assess the validity and reliability of the OD self-assessment measurement. Partial Least Square multiple regression analysis was used to explore characteristics and practices which represent facilitating and hindering factors in OD implementation.

Results

The survey revealed steady growth in the number of OD services worldwide, with 142 teams across 24 countries by 2022, primarily located in Europe. Referrals predominantly came from general practitioners, hospitals, and self-referrals. A wide range of diagnostic profiles was treated with OD, with psychotic disorders being the most common. OD teams comprised professionals from diverse backgrounds with varying levels of OD training. Factors positively associated with OD self-assessment included a high percentage of staff with OD training, periodic supervisions, research capacity, multi-professional teams, self-referrals, outpatient services, younger client groups, and the involvement of experts by experience in periodic supervision.

Conclusion

The findings provide valuable insights into the characteristics and practices of OD teams globally, highlighting the need for increased training opportunities, supervision, and research engagement. Future research should follow the development of OD implementation over time, complement self-assessment with rigorous observations and external evaluations, focus on involving different stakeholders in the OD-self-assessment and investigate the long-term outcomes of OD in different contexts.

Conceptualizing the peer contribution in Open Dialogue practice

In English mental health services, people with their own experience of mental distress have trained as Open Dialogue practitioners and have been employed as peer practitioners, co-working as equals alongside workers with professional backgrounds in Network Meetings. The conceptual underpinnings of the peer practitioner role have been drawn from the principles and relational approach of Intentional Peer Support. These have significant similarities with Open Dialogue, in terms of philosophical and theoretical orientations, with a particular focus on what happens in the "between" of a relational encounter. However, there are also significant differences in how practice principles are conceptualized, particularly around areas such as mutuality and self-disclosure. This article offers an analysis of this conceptual territory drawing on the relevant literature. This is then taken forward with the teasing out of specific practice principles that capture the unique contribution that peer practitioners can bring to Open Dialogue practice. These are derived through discussions that took place in an Action Learning Set for peer practitioners who have been involved in delivering Open Dialogue services in mainstream mental health service settings. This was part of a wider research study entitled Open Dialogue: Development and Evaluation of a Social Network Intervention for Severe Mental Illness (ODDESSI). The principles address how peer practitioners may be particularly well-placed to offer attunement, validation, connection and mutuality, and self-disclosure - and hence how they may be able to contribute an additional dimension to dialogical practice.

The contribution of anthropology to the study of Open Dialogue: ethnographic research methods and opportunities

When Open Dialogue diversifies internationally as an approach to mental healthcare, so too do the research methodologies used to describe, explain and evaluate this alternative to existing psychiatric services. This article considers the contribution of anthropology and its core method of ethnography among these approaches. It reviews the methodological opportunities in mental health research opened up by anthropology, and specifically the detailed knowledge about clinical processes and institutional contexts. Such knowledge is important in order to generalize innovations in practice by identifying contextual factors necessary to implementation that are unknowable in advance. The article explains the ethnographic mode of investigation, exploring this in more detail with an account of the method of one anthropological study under way in the UK focused on Peer-Supported Open Dialogue (POD) in the National Health Service (NHS). It sets out the objectives, design and scope of this research study, the varied roles of researchers, the sites of field research and the specific interaction between ethnography and Open Dialogue. This study is original in its design, context, conduct and the kind of data produced, and presents both opportunities and challenges. These are explained in order to raise issues of method that are of wider relevance to Open Dialogue research and anthropology.

The Pharmacist Prescriber: A Psychological Perspective on Complex Conversations about Medicines: Introducing Relational Prescribing and Open Dialogue in Physical Health

Pharmacists have traditionally supported the prescribing process, arguably in reactive or corrective roles. The advent of pharmacist prescribing in 2004 represented a major shift in practice, leading to greater responsibility for making clinical decisions with and for patients. Prescribing rights require pharmacists to take a more prescriptive role that will allow them to contribute to long-standing prescribing challenges such as poor medication adherence, overprescribing, and the need for shared decision-making and person-centered care. Central to these endeavors are the development and possession of effective consultation skills. University schools of pharmacists in the UK now routinely include consultation skills training, which is also provided by national education bodies. These challenges remain difficult to overcome, even though it is understood, for example, that increasing the effectiveness of adherence interventions may have a far greater impact on the health of the population than any improvement in specific medical treatments. More recently, a concerted effort has been made to tackle overprescribing and the harm that may occur through the inappropriate use of medication. In routine pharmacy work, these priorities may linger at the bottom of the list due to the busy and complex nature of the work. Solutions to these problems of adherence, optimizing benefits of medication, and overprescribing have typically been pragmatic and structured. However, an arguably reductionist approach to implementation fails to address the complex patient interactions around prescribing and taking medication, and the heterogeneity of the patient's experience, leaving the answers elusive. We suggest that it is essential to explore how person-centered care is perceived and to emphasize the relational aspects of clinical consultations. The development of routine pharmacist prescribing demands building on the core values of person-centered care and shared decision making by introducing the concepts of "relational prescribing" and "open dialogue" to cultivate an essential pharmacotherapeutic alliance to deliver concrete positive patient outcomes. We provide a vignette of how a clinical case can be approached using principles of relational prescribing and open dialogue. We believe these are solutions that are not additional tasks but must be embedded into pharmacy practice. This will improve professional satisfaction and resilience, and encourage curiosity and creativity, particularly with the advent of all pharmacists in Great Britain becoming prescribers at graduation from 2026.

The community mental health team fidelity scale: A measure of program fidelity of social networks interventions for severe mental illness

Open dialogue (OD) is a multi-component therapeutic and organizational intervention for crisis and continuing community mental health care with a therapeutic focus on clients' social networks. The development and implementation of this model of care in the United Kingdom requires considerable contextual adaptations which need to be assessed to support effective implementation. Program fidelity-the extent to which core components of an intervention are delivered as intended by an intervention protocol at all levels-is crucial for these adaptations.

Aims

To develop, pilot, and implement a program fidelity measure for community mental health services providing OD and 'treatment as usual' (TAU) or standard NHS crisis and community care.

Methods

Measure structure, content, and scoring were developed and refined through an iterative process of discussion between the research team and OD experts. Measure was piloted in the 6 OD and 6 TAU services participating in a large-scale research program.

Results

Initial data suggests that the Community Mental Health Team Fidelity Scale (COM-FIDE) is a potentially reliable and feasible measure of the fidelity of community mental health services and specific OD components of such services.

Implementation of open dialogue in Germany: Efforts, challenges, and obstacles

Purpose

The Open Dialogue (OD) approach has been implemented in different countries worldwide. OD not only depends on therapeutic principles but also requires a distinct set of structural changes that may impede its full implementation. In Germany, OD is currently practiced in different mental health care settings across the country. Yet, full implementation of OD principles is limited due to the extreme structural and financial fragmentation of the German mental health care system. With this as a background, the aim of this study was to investigate the efforts, challenges and obstacles of OD implementation in Germany.

Methods

This article presents the German results from the international HOPEnDIALOGUE survey, supplemented with expert interview data. Thirty eight teams currently providing OD took part in the survey. Sixteen expert interviews were carried out with stakeholders from various care settings. Survey data were analyzed descriptively and the qualitative data were evaluated using a thematic analysis approach.

Results

While having to adapt to the fragmented German health care system, OD has been mainly implemented from outpatient service providers and stand-alone services. About half of the teams implemented OD under the conditions of cross-sectoral model contracts and, thus, are considerably limited when it comes to OD implementation. Altogether, OD is not implemented to its full extent in each of the institutions surveyed. Similarly, the expert interviews revealed various challenges that mainly relate to the realization of OD's structural principles, whereas the implementation of its therapeutic benefits remains less affected. However, these challenges have managed to lead to great commitment by single teams and a certain level of implementation of OD-related concepts.

Conclusion

OD in Germany can currently only be fully implemented under the cross-sectoral care model contract system that is often temporary, thus significantly hindering its continuous development. Any evaluation of OD's effectiveness in Germany thus needs to take into account the fragmented nature of the country's health care system and control for the multiple barriers that impede implementation. Reforms of the German health care system are also urgently needed to create more favorable conditions for the implementation of OD.

Is 'another' psychiatry possible?

In this paper, we examine a number of approaches that propose new models for psychiatric theory and practices: in the way that they incorporate 'social' dimensions, in the way they involve 'communities' in treatment, in the ways that they engage mental health service users, and in the ways that they try to shift the power relations within the psychiatric encounter. We examine the extent to which 'alternatives' - including 'Postpsychiatry', 'Open Dialogue', the 'Power, Threat and Meaning Framework' and Service User Involvement in Research - really do depart from mainstream models in terms of theory, practice and empirical research and identify some shortcomings in each. We propose an approach which seeks more firmly to ground mental distress within the lifeworld of those who experience it, with a particular focus on the biopsychosocial niches within which we make our lives, and the impact of systematic disadvantage, structural violence and other toxic exposures within the spaces and places that constitute and constrain many everyday lives. Further, we argue that a truly alternative psychiatry requires psychiatric professionals to go beyond simply listening to the voices of service users: to overcome epistemic injustice requires professionals to recognise that those who have experience of mental health services have their own expertise in accounting for their distress and in evaluating alternative forms of treatment. Finally we suggest that, if 'another psychiatry' is possible, this requires a radical reimagination of the role and responsibilities of the medically trained psychiatrist within and outside the clinical encounter.

Development of the peer-supported open dialogue attitude and competence inventory for practitioners: A Delphi study

Introduction

Peer-supported Open Dialogue (POD) is a novel approach to mental health care that is currently being practiced and researched in the United Kingdom. For POD to be successfully implemented, effective training must be provided to make sure trainees are prepared to deliver the approach as intended. Therefore, a specific instrument that can assess the development and competence of POD trainees, as well as the effectiveness of POD training is crucial. Therefore, the current study aimed to establish an inventory named the Peer-supported Open Dialogue Attitude and Competence Inventory (PODACI), measuring the changes in attributes and attitudes of trainees before and after training.

Methods and Results

To generate the inventory, a four-round modified Delphi approach was used. We first identified the dimensions that are essential and specific to POD through an extensive literature review and individual interviews with practitioners (n = 8). After generating the items, we further refined the items through two rounds of questionnaires, asking practitioners to rate the relevance of each item from 1 (not essential) to 4 (highly essential; n = 21 and n = 10), and finalized the inventory via a focus group interview with POD trainers (n = 4). In total, 76 items were included in the PODACI. A good consensus on the items was reached: the median score of the items was all above 3.00 (essential) and achieved an agreement level greater than 85%. The Kendall coordination coefficient W was 0.36 and 0.28 in the two questionnaires employed, indicating a fair level of agreement between participants.

Discussion

The PODACI provides a way to measure attitudinal and competency factors related to the treatment integrity of POD as well as the efficacy of the training courses being offered. This highly enriched instrument opens up a wide range of possibilities for POD research and application, facilitating the development of Open Dialogue services. The next step is to assess the psychometric properties of the inventory.

No safety without emotional safety

This Personal View highlights how emotional safety is required for a person to keep themselves physically safe. We explain how trying to control behaviour to increase physical safety in the short term can carry the unintended consequence of reducing emotional safety, which might in turn result in higher levels of stress and hopelessness. We use examples from institutions with psychiatric inpatients to describe these processes. We argue that emotional and physical safety cannot be separated, and therefore that the absence of emotional safety compromises basic care either in an acute crisis or in the long term. Staff who fear being criticised, and so feel driven to take autonomy and responsibility away from patients, unwittingly undermine patients' experience of being empathically understood and supported, adding to patients' sense of emotional turmoil and lack of safety. We suggest that a change in culture and regulatory reform is required to bring psychiatric care more in line with the psychological needs of patients to achieve both physical and emotional safety.

Peer support and shared decision making in Open Dialogue: Opportunities and recommendations

Open dialogue (OD) is a person-centred social network model of crisis and continuing mental healthcare, which promotes agency and long-term recovery in mental illness. Peer support workers who have lived experience of mental illness play a key role in OD in the UK, as they enhance shared understanding of mental health crisis as part of the OD model and provide a sense of belonging and social inclusion. These elements are in alignment with the shared decision making (SDM) approach in mental health, which focuses on person-centred communication in treatment decision-making. The previously documented benefits of peer-led SDM include increased engagement with services, symptom reduction, increased employment opportunities, and reduced utilization of mental and general health services. While the contribution of peer support and SDM principles to OD has been acknowledged, there is only a small body of literature surrounding this development, and little guidance on how peer support can enhance treatment decision-making and other aspects of OD. This viewpoint, which was co-authored by people with lived experience of mental illness, clinicians, and researchers, discusses practical implications and recommendations for research and training for the provision of a co-produced OD model grounded in peer support and SDM.

What is the evidence for antipsychotic medication and alternative psychosocial interventions for people with acute, non-affective psychosis?

In this Personal View, we critically appraise and summarise evidence for antipsychotic drugs and alternatives to drug treatment, with a focus on people in their first episode or acute relapses of schizophrenia and related conditions within the first 5-10 years of illness. There is a large body of generally moderate quality evidence from randomised controlled trials for antipsychotics in both treating acute psychosis and reducing relapse, in thousands of people in their first episode and in established illness. There is a much smaller evidence base, of generally low quality, in a few hundred people, for potential benefits of non-drug interventions, such as cognitive behavioural therapy, Open Dialogue, Soteria, and psychoanalytic psychotherapy.