Shared decision making for psychiatric medication management: beyond the micro-social

Attitudes of patients with schizophrenia spectrum or bipolar disorders towards medication self-management during hospitalisation

BACKGROUND

Medication self-management (MSM) is defined as a person's ability to cope with medication treatment for a chronic condition, along with the associated physical and psychosocial effects that the medication causes in their daily lives. For many patients, it is important to be able to self-manage their medication successfully, as they will often be expected to do after discharge.

AIM

The aim of this study was to describe the willingness and attitudes of patients with schizophrenia spectrum or bipolar disorders regarding MSM during hospital admission. A secondary aim was to identify various factors associated with patient willingness to participate in MSM and to describe their assumptions concerning needs and necessary conditions, as well as their attitudes towards their medication.

METHODS

A multicentre, quantitative cross-sectional observational design was used to study the willingness and attitudes of psychiatric patients regarding MSM during hospitalisation. The study adhered to guidelines for Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE).

RESULTS

In this study, 84 patients, of which 43 were patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders and 41 were patients with bipolar disorders, participated. A majority of the patients (81%) were willing to participate in MSM during their hospitalisation. Analysis revealed patients are more willing to MSM if they are younger (r = -.417, p < .001) and a decreasing number of medicines (r = -.373, p = .003). Patients' willingness was positively associated with the extent of support by significant others during and after hospitalisation (Pearson's r = .298, p = .011). Patients were convinced that they would take their medication more correctly if MSM were to be allowed during hospitalisation (65%).

CONCLUSION

Most of the patients were willing to self-manage their medication during hospitalisation, however, under specific conditions such as being motivated to take their medication correctly and to understand the benefits of their medication.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

From a policy point of view, our study provided useful insights into how patients look at MSM to enable the development of future strategies. Since patients are willing to self-manage their medication during hospitalisation, this may facilitate its implementation.

PATIENT CONTRIBUTION

Patients were recruited for this study. Participation was voluntary, and signed informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to the questionnaire.

Antipsychotics and Identity: The Adverse Effect No One is Talking About

People who take antipsychotics, and people who are prescribed antipsychotics without taking them, experience effects which are not frequently discussed: effects on their identity and sense of self. Qualitative research indicates the relationship between taking APs and identity is multilayered, and changeable. Taking APs can restore people to their earlier, pre-symptom sense of self. Being prescribed and taking APs can also, on the other hand, be experienced as damaging, erasing and dulling people's sense of who they are. This complexity deserves exploration in clinical practice, which we believe is currently not done routinely. More work is needed to understand whether, and how, the relationship between identity and APs is being addressed. We outline the importance of having discussions in a clinical space around identity, and a sense of agency, on the grounds that true recovery-oriented care, which enacts shared decision-making principles, demands it. Further, we argue that it will allow for better therapeutic alliance and trust to be forged between clinician and client, ultimately leading to better care.

Shifting Perspectives on the Challenges of Shared Decision Making in Mental Health Care

Although shared decision making (SDM) has become the most preferable way in doctor-patient communication, it is not fully implemented in mental health care likely due to the complex nature of psychiatric syndromes and treatments. In this review we provide a systematic overview of all perceived and reported barriers to SDM in the literature, acknowledging field-specific challenges, and offering perspectives to promote its wider use. We conducted a systematic search of the wider literature in different databases and included all publications mentioning specified barriers to SDM in psychiatric care. Relevant data and opinions were categorised into micro-, meso- and macro-level themes and put into clinical perspective. We derived 20 barriers to SDM from 100 studies and reports. Eight were on micro-level care delivery, seven involved meso-level issues, five concerned macro-level themes. The multitude of perceived and actual barriers to SDM underline the challenges its implementation poses in mental health care, some of which can be resolved while others are inherent to the nature of the care, with its long-term relationships, complex dynamics, and social consequences, all requiring a flexible approach. We present four perspectives to help change views on the potential of SDM in mental health care.

Measures of Shared Decision Making for People With Mental Disorders and Limited Decisional Capacity: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Shared decision making (SDM) is a health communication model to improve treatment decision making and is underused for people with mental health conditions and limited, impaired, or fluctuating decisional capacity. SDM measures are essential to enhancing the adoption and implementation of SDM practices, yet no tools or research findings exist that explicitly focus on measuring SDM with such patients. The aim of this review was to identify instruments that measure SDM involving individuals with mental health conditions and limited decisional capacity, their family members, and their health and social care providers.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed by searching the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and PsycInfo databases. The authors included peer-reviewed, quantitative articles published in English during 2009-2022 that focused on adults (≥18 years old). All authors performed the screening independently.

RESULTS

A total of 7,956 records were identified, six of which met the inclusion criteria for full-text review and five of which were analyzed (one full-text article was not available). No instruments were identified that measured forms of SDM involving patients with mental health conditions and limited, impaired, or fluctuating decisional capacity.

CONCLUSIONS

Measurement instruments to address and assess SDM in health care-related communication processes involving individuals with a mental health condition and limited decisional capacity are needed.

Shared decision making and associated factors among patients with psychotic disorders: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making is a process where patients and clinicians collaborate to make treatment choices based on the patients' preferences and best available evidence. The implementation of shared decision making remains limited for patients with psychotic disorders despite being recommended at policy level, being advocated as ethical right and wanted by the patient's. A barrier to implementation that is often mentioned is reduced decision-making capacity among patients. The challenges of implementing shared decision making highlights a need for more knowledge on shared decision making for these patients. Moreover, the association between patient-related characteristics and shared decision making is unclear, and further research have been suggested. More knowledge of factors associated with involvement in shared decision making can enhance understanding and help to empower patients in the decision-making process. The current study examined the extent of reported shared decision making among patients with a psychotic disorder in mental health care and factors associated with shared decision making.

METHODS

This study included 305 participants with a psychotic disorder from 39 clinical inpatient and outpatient sites across Norway. Shared decision making was assessed using the CollaboRATE survey. A linear mixed model was estimated to assess characteristics associated with shared decision making scores.

RESULTS

The CollaboRATE mean score was 6.3 (ranging from 0 to 9), the top score was 14.1% and increased global satisfaction with services was significantly associated with a higher level of shared decision making (regression coefficient 0.27, 95% confidence interval (0.23; 0.32), p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The low top score shows that few patients felt that they received the highest possible quality of shared decision making, indicating that many patients found room for improvement. This suggests that services for patients with psychotic disorders should be designed to give them a greater role in decision making. Shared decision making might play a key role in mental health care, ensuring that patients with psychotic disorders are satisfied with the services provided.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03271242, date of registration: 5 Sept. 2017.

Experiences of reduction and discontinuation of antipsychotics: a qualitative investigation within the RADAR trial

Background

Antipsychotics are a core treatment for psychosis, but the evidence for gradual dose reductions guided by clinicians is under-developed. The RADAR randomised controlled trial (RCT) compared antipsychotic reduction and possible discontinuation with maintenance treatment for people with recurrent psychotic disorders. The current study explored participants' experiences of antipsychotic reduction or discontinuation within this trial.

Methods

This qualitative study was embedded within the RADAR RCT (April 2017-March 2022) that recruited 253 participants from specialist community mental health services in 19 public healthcare localities in England. Participants were adults with recurrent non affective psychosis who were taking antipsychotic medication. Semi-structured interviews, lasting 30-90 min, were conducted after the trial final 24-month follow-up with 26 people who reduced and/or discontinued antipsychotics within the trial, sampled purposively for diversity in sociodemographic characteristics, trial variables, and pre-trial medication and clinical factors. Data were analysed using thematic analysis and findings are reported qualitatively.

Findings

Most participants reported reduced adverse effects of antipsychotics with dose reductions, primarily in mental clouding, emotional blunting and sedation, and some positive impacts on social functioning and sense of self. Over half experienced deteriorations in mental health, including psychotic symptoms and intolerable levels of emotional intensity. Nine had a psychotic relapse. The trial context in which medication reduction was explicitly part of clinical care provided various learning opportunities. Some participants were highly engaged with reduction processes, and despite difficulties including relapses, developed novel perspectives on medication, dose optimisation, and how to manage their mental health. Others were more ambivalent about reduction or experienced less overall impact.

Interpretation

Experiences of antipsychotic reductions over two years were dynamic and diverse, shaped by variations in dose reduction profiles, reduction effects, personal motivation and engagement levels, and relationships with prescribers. There are relapse risks and challenges, but some people experience medication reduction done with clinical guidance as empowering. Clinicians can use findings to inform and work flexibly with service users to establish optimal antipsychotic doses.

Funding

National Institute for Health Research.

Shared decision making with schizophrenic patients: a randomized controlled clinical trial with booster sessions (DECIDE Study)

BACKGROUND

The treatment of schizophrenia requires a prolonged, multidimensional intervention that includes antipsychotic drugs. Treatment adherence is essential to effectively control the disorder. Shared decision-making (SDM) is a strategy, supported by numerous practical and ethical arguments, that seeks to involve patients in the therapeutic process to improve treatment adherence and satisfaction. The use of this model in mental health has been limited for many intrinsic and extrinsic reasons. The results of clinical trials conducted to date have largely been disappointing, potential due to study design-related limitations.

AIM/QUESTION

To evaluate the efficacy, in terms of treatment adherence and improvement in clinical variables, such as severity of symptoms, days of hospitalization or insight, of a carefully timed SDM model initiated immediately prior to hospital discharge in patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

Single-blind, randomized clinical trial in an acute psychiatric care unit within the Andalusian Health Department to compare SDM (experimental group) to treatment as usual (TAU; control group) in a sample of patients hospitalized for an acute episode of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. The study was performed between January 2014 and June 2017. The experimental group participated in SDM sessions prior to discharge with regular booster sessions over the one-year follow-up. The health care team responsible for SDM was predisposed to concordance (LatCon II scale) and received specific training in SDM. A hierarchical multiple linear regression analysis was performed to evaluate the factors independently associated with adherence, controlling for sociodemographic, clinical, and admission-related variables. Variables were assessed at admission, discharge and at 3, 6 and 12 months after discharge during the one year follow up. BARS, DAI, WAI-S, COMRADE and PANSS were used to evaluate adherence, attitude to treatment, therapeutic alliance, satisfaction and confidence with decision and clinical status, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 227 schizophrenic patients hospitalized with acute decompensation were evaluated; of these, 102 met all inclusion criteria and were included in the study. Most patients (95%) had prior experience with antipsychotics and most (82%) had experienced related side effects. Despite randomization, psychopathologic severity was greater in the experimental group, with a mean (SD) PANSS score of 104.08 (80) vs. 93.45 (20.30) (p < 0.05). The final regression model to explain adherence was significant (adjusted R2 = 0.384; F [df= 6] = 4.386; p < 0.001), with a direct, significant and independent association with SDM mediated by the number of booster sessions.

DISCUSSION

Shared decision making with booster sessions appears to increase treatment adherence in patients with severe mental disorders.

IMPLICATION ON PRACTICE

Ethical, practical, and clinical reasons support the use of strategies designed promote the use of long-term, shared decision-making in psychiatric patients, especially in schizophrenia spectrum disorder.

Decision-making among adolescents prescribed antipsychotic medications: Interviews to gain perspectives of youth without psychosis or mania

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to understand the experiences of youth who had been prescribed antipsychotics but did not have psychosis, mania, autism spectrum disorder, or developmental disability.

METHODS

Twenty-three qualitative telephone interviews were conducted with youth aged 11-18 who had been prescribed an antipsychotic medication but did not have a diagnosis of psychotic disorder, bipolar disorder, autism spectrum disorder, or developmental disability. Participants were recruited from four U.S. healthcare systems participating in the pragmatic trial Safer Use of Antipsychotics in Youth (SUAY). Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed using template analysis techniques.

RESULTS

Prior to initiating an antipsychotic medication, most participants experienced behavioral health crises; many felt that they had no options other than to start the medication. Other core themes included: (1) antipsychotics had both positive psychosocial outcomes, such as improvement of family life, and adverse effects, such as drowsiness or weight gain, (2) antipsychotics were only one part of a broader treatment plan, (3) efforts were made to maximize benefits and minimize side effects through careful titration, (4) feedback from friends and family was important in the decision to continue.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings provide valuable insights into how to engage youth in conversations around the use of antipsychotics.

A qualitative exploration of family members' perspectives on reducing and discontinuing antipsychotic medication

BACKGROUND

Antipsychotics are routinely prescribed to people diagnosed with schizophrenia or psychosis on a long-term basis. Considerable literature explores service users' opinions and experiences of antipsychotics, but studies investigating family members' views are lacking.

AIMS

To explore family members' perspectives on antipsychotics, particularly their views on long-term use, reduction and discontinuation of antipsychotics.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 family members of people experiencing psychosis. Participants were recruited through community support groups and mental health teams. Interviews were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

The majority of family members valued antipsychotic medication primarily in supporting what they saw as a fragile stability in the person they cared for. Their views of medication were ambivalent, combining concerns about adverse effects with a belief in the importance of medication due to fears of relapse. They described a need for constant vigilance in relation to medication to ensure it was taken consistently, and often found changes, particularly reduction in medication difficult to contemplate.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings highlight that family members' attitudes to medication sometimes conflict with those of the people they care for, impacting on their health and the caring relationship. Family members may need more support and could be usefully involved in medication decision-making.

Perspectives of Patients and Providers in Using Shared Decision Making in Psychiatry

There is increased interest over the last decade in the use of Shared Decision Making with individuals with serious mental illness to improve engagement in treatment and clinical outcomes. We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with 15 individuals with serious mental illness treated in an outpatient transitional care clinic serving people immediately after discharge from a psychiatric hospitalization. Parallel interviews were conducted with a variety of clinical providers (n = 9). Using latent thematic analysis, six themes were identified including: (1) Differences in the Use of SDM, (2) Consideration of Past Experiences, (3) Decisional Power Preferences, (4) Use of SDM in Psychiatry Versus Other Areas of Medicine, (5) Dignity and Disengagement, and (6) External Forces Impacting SDM. Implications for clinical practice and research using a shared decision-making approach within this treatment setting are further discussed.

Shared Decision Making in the Psychiatric Inpatient Setting: An Ethnographic Study about Interprofessional Psychiatric Consultations

Shared decision making is increasingly receiving attention in health care and might improve both the quality of care and patient outcomes. Nevertheless, due to its complexity, implementation of shared decision making in clinical practice seems challenging. This ethnographic study aimed to gain a better understanding of how psychiatric inpatients and the interprofessional care team interact during regular interprofessional psychiatric consultations. Data were collected through participant observation on two different psychiatric wards in a large psychiatric hospital in Switzerland. The observation focused on the contextual aspects of interprofessional patient consultations, the communication and interaction as well as the extent to which patients were involved in decision making. Participants included patients, psychiatrists, junior physicians, nurses, psychologists, social workers and therapists. We observed 71 interprofessional psychiatric consultations and they differed substantially in both wards in terms of context (place and form) and culture (way of interacting). On the contrary, results showed that the level of patient involvement in decision making was comparable and depended on individual factors, such as the health care professionals’ communication style as well as the patients’ personal initiative to be engaged. The main topics discussed with the patients related to pharmacotherapy and patient reported symptoms. Health care professionals in both wards used a rather unidirectional communication style. Therefore, in order to promote patient involvement in the psychiatric inpatient setting, rather than to focus on contextual factors, consultations should follow a specific agenda and promoting a bidirectional communication style for all parties involved is strongly recommended.

Experiences of shared decision making among patients with psychotic disorders in Norway: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) is a process where the patient and the health professional collaborate to make decisions based on both the patient's preferences and the best available evidence. Patients with psychotic disorders are less involved in making decisions than they would like. More knowledge of these patients' experiences of SDM may improve implementation. The study aim was to describe and explore experiences of SDM among patients with psychotic disorders in mental health care.

METHODS

Individual interviews were conducted with ten persons with a psychotic disorder. They were service users of two community mental health centres. The transcribed material was analysed using qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Four-fifths of the participants in this study found that they received insufficient information about their health situation and treatment options. All participants experienced that only one kind of treatment was often presented, which was usually medication. Although the study found that different degrees of involvement were practised, two thirds of the participants had little impact on choices to be made. This was despite the fact that they wanted to participate and felt capable of participating, even during periods of more severe illness. The participants described how important it was that SDM in psychosis was based on a trusting relationship, but stated that it took time to establish such a relationship.

CONCLUSIONS

This study with ten participants indicates that patients with psychotic disorders experienced that they were not allowed to participate as much as they wanted to and believed they were capable of. Some patients were involved, but to a lesser degree than in SDM. More and better tailored information communicated within a trusting relationship is needed to provide psychotic patients with a better basis for active involvement in decisions about their health care.

Shared and Supported Decision Making in Medication in a Mental Health Setting: How Far Have We Come?

Personalised care involves shared decision making (SDM) across all levels including choice in medication. However, there are a number of barriers which prevent its effective implementation in routine mental health settings. Therefore, we undertook a study to benchmark current practice across clinical services of a large urban mental health provider. The study formed part of the trust-wide 'Supported Decision Making in Medication' Co-Production Project and aims to inform future recommendations in delivering against contemporary best practice, guidance and policy. A survey exploring the views and experiences of service users and prescribers on shared and supported decision-making in medication was carried out in West London NHS Trust. Questionnaires were fully co-designed and co-delivered by a group of health professionals and individuals with lived experience. There were 100 responses from service users and 35 from prescribers. There was some good practice where both parties reported good quality conversations concerning dialogic styles, collaborative process, information provided and range of choice offered. However, prescriber's perception of their practice was not always mirrored by service user feedback whose experiences often depended upon the prescriber, the time available or the part of the service. Generally, service user experience fell short of the good practice cited by clinicians though there was noticeable variability. Commitment from organizations and increasing understanding from practitioners are vital in transforming SDM from rhetoric into reality. From our findings a further challenge is to ensure that prescribers and service users have the time, information and tools to implement it consistently.

Patients as team members: Factors affecting involvement in treatment decisions from the perspective of patients with a chronic condition

BACKGROUND

Active patient involvement in treatment decisions is seen as a feature of patient-centred care that will ultimately lead to better healthcare services and patient outcomes. Although many factors have been identified that influence patient involvement in treatment decisions, little is known about the different views that patients have on which factors are most important.

OBJECTIVE

This study explores the views of patients with a chronic condition on factors influencing their involvement in treatment decisions.

DESIGN

Q-methodology was used to study the views of patients. Respondents were asked to rank a set of 42 statements from the least important to the most important for active patient involvement in treatment decision-making. The set of 42 statements was developed based on a literature search and a pilot in which two external researchers, 15 patients and four healthcare professionals participated. A total of 136 patients with one of three major chronic conditions were included: diabetes types 1 and 2, respiratory disease (i.e., chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma) and cancer (i.e., breast cancer and prostate cancer). Data were collected in a face-to-face interview setting in the Netherlands.

RESULTS

Four distinct views on the factors influencing active patient involvement were identified among patients with a chronic condition. (1) Enabled involvement: the extent to which patients are facilitated and empowered to participate will lead to patient involvement. (2) Relationship-driven involvement: the relationship between patients and healthcare professionals drives patient involvement. (3) Disease impact-driven involvement: the severity of disease drives patient involvement. (4) Cognition-driven involvement: knowledge and information drive patient involvement.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

From the patients' perspective, this study shows that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to involving patients more actively in their healthcare journey. Strategies aiming to enhance active patient involvement among patients with a chronic condition should consider this diversity in perspectives among these patients.

PATIENT CONTRIBUTION

Patients are the respondents as this study researches their perspective on factors influencing patient involvement. In addition, patients were involved in pilot-testing the statement set.

The role of trust and hope in antipsychotic medication reviews between GPs and service users a realist review

BACKGROUND

Increasing number of service users diagnosed with schizophrenia and psychosis are being discharged from specialist secondary care services to primary care, many of whom are prescribed long-term antipsychotics. It is unclear if General Practitioners (GPs) have the confidence and experience to appropriately review and adjust doses of antipsychotic medication without secondary care support.

AIM

To explore barriers and facilitators of conducting antipsychotic medication reviews in primary care for individuals with no specialist mental health input.

DESIGN & SETTING

Realist review in general practice settings.

METHOD

A realist review has been conducted to synthesise evidence on antipsychotic medication reviews conducted in primary care with service users diagnosed with schizophrenia or psychosis. Following initial scoping searches and discussions with stakeholders, a systematic search and iterative secondary searches were conducted. Articles were systematically screened and analysed to develop a realist programme theory explaining the contexts (C) and mechanisms (M) which facilitate or prevent antipsychotic medication reviews (O) in primary care settings, and the potential outcomes of medication reviews.

RESULTS

Meaningful Antipsychotic medication reviews may not occur for individuals with only primary care medical input. Several, often mutually reinforcing, mechanisms have been identified as potential barriers to conducting such reviews, including low expectations of recovery for people with severe mental illness, a perceived lack of capability to understand and participate in medication reviews, linked with a lack of information shared in appointments between GPs and Service Users, perceived risk and uncertainty regarding antipsychotic medication and illness trajectory.

CONCLUSIONS

The review identified reciprocal and reinforcing stereotypes affecting both GPs and service users. Possible mechanisms to counteract these barriers are discussed, including realistic expectations of medication, and the need for increased information sharing and trust between GPs and service users.

A qualitative study of service users' experiences of mental health nurses' knowledge and skills in relation to medication

INTRODUCTION

The role of the mental health nurse in relation to medications remains complex. Despite an increasing focus on pharmacology within pre-registration nurse education, there is limited research exploring how mental health service users experience mental health nurses' knowledge and skills in relation to medication.

AIM

To explore the experiences of service users working with mental health nurses, in relation to the nurses' knowledge and skills associated with medicines management.

METHOD

The research prioritized the principles of co-production and was undertaken collaboratively with a researcher with lived experience. Data were collected via semi-structured interviews with individuals who have accessed UK mental health services. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and subjected to thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Three themes were generated from the data: inconsistencies in knowledge and practice, holistic therapeutic engagement and dialogical approach to medicines.

DISCUSSION

Service users may have a sense of uncertainty around the role of the nurse, potentially resulting in frustration and anxiety. However, mental health nurses also possess unique skills in relation to medicines management.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The findings emphasize that service users value not only pharmacological knowledge but also unique skills in facilitating dialogue, prioritising shared decision-making and practical support in medicines optimization.

Family Group Conferences as a Shared Decision-Making Strategy in Adults Mental Health Work

Family Group conferences (FGC) provide a system by which a client and their family reach jointly key intervention decisions, from a number of options proposed by professionals. The system originated in child protection social work. Conceptually FGC is based on the assumption that the family is potentially a supportive social system for an individual with a variety of difficulties, including mental ill health. Reaching a family network agreement can lead to long term positive outcomes in self-confidence and social relationships. This strategy of shared decision making (SDM) can re-unite the family around the client's needs and wishes. It fits well the strengths based and the recovery-oriented approaches to mental ill health. Methodologically, this article provides a narrative review of existing empirical research about FGC in the context of adult mental health. In addition, two community case studies consisting of videos of a mother experiencing mental ill health and a daughter are analysed in terms of their subjective experience of the FGCs they were involved in, and looks at both the process and the outcomes of FGCs. The key findings demonstrate a high level of satisfaction from participating in the FGC meeting, while the evidence pertaining to the outcomes is inconclusive. Only very few systematic review studies, or comparative studies of different approaches to family decision making, exist, and there are no studies which offer cost effectiveness analysis. Discussion: The observed gap between the satisfaction from the process of FGC by the participants vs. the inconclusive outcomes relates to the implementation phase, in which the decisions made by the family are tested. Evaluating FGC processes and outcomes is complex. A systematic and comprehensive research of the implementation process is missing at this stage. In conclusion, FGC is a promising strategy of SDM in adult mental health. The research evidence indicates the need for further exploration of its implementation process, evaluative methodology and methods.

Mental health service users experiences of medication discontinuation: a systematic review of qualitative studies

BACKGROUND

The use of psychotropic medication is often the first line of treatment for people with mental distress. However, many service users discontinue their prescribed medication, and little is known about their experiences or the reasons why they choose to stop taking medication.

AIM

The aim of this review is to synthesize research literature focused on the experiences of people who decided to discontinue taking medication for their mental health problem.

METHODS

A systematic review of qualitative studies was conducted. Data bases were searched for qualitative research which explored participants' motivations for discontinuing medication and their experiences of the process.

RESULTS

Six themes were identified: (1) Taking medications: a loss of autonomy, (2) Discontinuing medication: a thought-out process, (3) Factors influencing the decision to discontinue medication, (4) Discontinuing medication: experiences of the process, (5) Outcomes of discontinuing medication, (6) Managing mental distress in the absence of medication.

CONCLUSION

Service providers need to be aware that for some service user's psychotropic medication is not deemed a suitable treatment approach. Those who wish to discontinue medication need to be supported in the context of positive, therapeutic risk where their mental and physical health can be monitored and the likelihood of success increased.

Correlates of preferring a passive role in decision-making among patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVE

To assess the factors associated with the persistence of clinician-led style in the therapeutic relationship in cases of serious mental illness, and the conditioning factors that the patients identify as determinants of their health.

METHOD

Assessment of preferences in the decision-making process and health-related control locus of 107 outpatients with DSM-5 diagnosis of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. Demographic and clinical information was also obtained through review of available records and using several scales.

RESULTS

64.4 % patients preferred to adopt a passive role in the therapeutic relationship. In the multivariate analysis, the preference of playing a passive role in the decision-making process was significantly associated with the elderly, being disabled, or the view that one's health depends on doctors (AUC ROC value: 0.80).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with severe mental illness more frequently preferred a passive role in the decision-making process. We found several factors associated with a preference for the "expert role" model.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The identified factors may permit care to be tailored to the most probable expectations as regard decision-making. Since the populations concerned may be vulnerable and suffer inequalities in the provision of health services, promoting participation in the care process could help improve clinical parameters ethically.

Living beyond the limitation: Rehabilitation, life and productivity of individuals with schizophrenia in South-West Nigeria

INTRODUCTION

Schizophrenia, the most chronic and stigmatized form of mental illness, can be described as a brain disorder that affects an individual's cognition. Individuals with schizophrenia exhibit socially unacceptable symptoms that affect their psychosocial lives. They suffer from reduced productivity due to the debilitating effect of the illness, and the negative symptoms impede their employability; such symptoms and effects aggravate the stigma around mental illness. However, when rehabilitation is successfully achieved, so is productivity, and this decreases the associated stigma. Thus, this study describes the rehabilitation experiences and productivity of individuals with schizophrenia in South-West Nigeria.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A descriptive qualitative approach with semi-structured interviews was used to gather information from mental health service users. The discharged users in this study received in-hospital or outpatient rehabilitation care at four outpatient units within two specialist mental health-care facilities in South-West Nigeria. These facilities offer vocational training and rehabilitation services for individuals with schizophrenia. Twenty-nine mental health service users were interviewed. The data from the interviews were independently analysed by two researchers through a content analysis approach using NVIVO version 11. The researchers compared the results of the analysis and reached an agreement on the conclusion.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The rehabilitation services availed by patients in the research setting are of three types. Some attend occupational rehabilitation to learn a trade; they depend on professionals for the choice of skill but at a cost that is not affordable to many. Some stay in rehabilitation units linked to the hospital, rendering their services at a cost, and their living expenses and skill acquisition processes are based on the remuneration they get from the services rendered to the institution. Others depend on their family members' efforts to afford rehabilitation services but set up on job by family or employed in family business. The mental health service users in this study who offered their services to the institutions were able to make informed decisions and showed better performance with their chosen occupation than those who depended on their family or health professionals for the choice of rehabilitation service or vocational career. Therefore, this study concludes that prioritizing mental health facility users' preferences in terms of productive activities (sales, services, vocation) or rehabilitation goals should be encouraged.

Chinese mental health professionals' perceptions of shared decision-making regarding people diagnosed with schizophrenia: A qualitative study

The implementation of shared decision-making regarding people diagnosed with schizophrenia is limited, although it is reported to have a positive impact on improving treatment adherence, therapeutic relationships and saving medical costs. The successful implementation of it is mainly dependent on the active engagement of mental health professionals. This study aims to identify mental health professionals' perceptions of shared decision-making regarding people diagnosed with schizophrenia in collectivist cultures such as Chinese culture. A qualitative descriptive approach was used, involving ten individual interviews with psychiatrists and four focus groups with twenty-three mental health nurses from the psychiatry department of a tertiary hospital in mainland China. An inductive thematic approach was used to analyze the data. Two main themes with five subthemes generated: willingness to engage in shared decision-making and perceiving shared decision-making as unachievable. The last theme included five subthemes: (i) deference to authority, (ii) tension between family decision-making and patient autonomy, (iii) uncertainty of trusting therapeutic relationships, (iv) implicit persuasion and (v) insufficient consultation time. Patients often lack opportunity and support to engage in decision-making. Mental health nurses in other countries need to be aware that Chinese patients and patients with a similar background are not knowledgeable about or value shared decision-making to the extent that other countries might. They need to evaluate and support them, including encouraging them to engage in decision-making as well as providing appropriate information. Mental health nurses need to collaborate with patients and their families to achieve patient-centred care when family involvement is expected.

Shared decision making for psychiatric medication management: a summary of its uptake, barriers and facilitators

The model of shared decision making with mental health patients and clinicians (doctors and pharmacists) harnesses the benefits of patients becoming partners in their own recovery through improved communication and greater self-advocacy. Shared decision making in mental health services is an emerging model of care which has not been well investigated, however it is seen as the way forward to achieving improved health outcomes for non-pharmacological and pharmacological therapy. Successful implementation of this model requires supporting the process through provision of information and training, use of decision aids, coaching in communication skills and inclusion of family and carers in the decision making process. This summary examines the application of the shared decision making model for psychiatric medication management, including barriers and facilitators.

Evaluating the feasibility of a decision aid to promote shared decision making among young adults with first-episode psychosis: protocol for a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Young adults ages 18 to 25 with first episode psychosis (FEP) have an increased risk of discontinuation antipsychotic medications and psychiatric service disengagement that lead to symptom exacerbation and deterioration. We seek to (1) examine the feasibility, usability, and potential impact of a Shared Decision Making (SDM) Antipsychotic Medication Decision Aid (DA) on decision-making, adherence to the decision made, and service engagement among young adults with FEP and (2) understand the role of additional patient-level factors on SDM.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial is being conducted in a coordinated specialty care community program for FEP in an urban setting. Eligible patients are randomly assigned to receive an intervention, the Antipsychotic Medication Decision Aid, or treatment as usual. Patients receive their assigned intervention before their medication appointment with the psychiatrist and complete four interviews: before the appointment (T0), after the appointment (T1), and at 3- and 6-month follow-ups (T2 and T3). The study staff and participating psychiatrists are not blinded to the intervention. The data are de-identified to maintain blinding during the analysis process. The primary aims are feasibility of intervention delivery and research procedures and preliminary impact of the intervention on SDM-related outcomes, medication adherence, and service engagement. As a secondary aim, we will explore the contribution of personality and motivation variables, clinical relationships, cognitive functioning, and mental-health-related stigma to SDM. If the sample size permits, we plan to conduct parametric tests such as independent-samples t tests at T1 to compare differences in SDM, adherence, and engagement scales. In the case of a small sample size, we will use non-parametric tests and descriptive statistics.

DISCUSSION

This protocol outlines the methodology for a feasibility pilot comparing the effect of a novel SDM Antipsychotic Medication encounter DA with treatment as usual on SDM, medication adherence, and service engagement in FEP care. SDM is endorsed as a framework for use in FEP and antipsychotic pharmacotherapy, but its impact on adherence and health outcomes is unclear. Understanding the potential contribution of an SDM Antipsychotic Medication DA compared with usual care in psychosis pharmacotherapy is critical. The study will help answer several key questions new to SDM research, including the contribution of personality and clinical relationships to SDM in mental health and psychosis in particular. The study will serve to gather feasibility data to inform future studies and scale-up.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Ethics approval was obtained through Temple University's institutional review board (IRB) and the City of Philadelphia's Department of Public Health IRB. The study has been retrospectively registered with ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT04373590 on 29 April 2020. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04373590?term=NCT04373590&draw=2&rank=1.

Barriers and Enablers to Shared Decision Making in Psychiatric Medication Management: A Qualitative Investigation of Clinician and Service Users' Views

Shared decisionmaking (SDM) is a recommended health communication approach in mental health settings. Yet, implementation of SDM in psychiatric consultations discussing medication management is challenging. Insufficient attention has been given to examine the views of both clinicians and service users together about the experiences of SDM in psychiatric medication management. The purpose of this paper is to examine the views of service users, community psychiatric nurses, and psychiatrists about enablers and barriers of SDM. A thematic analysis of 30 semi structured interviews with service users, psychiatrists, and community psychiatric nurses, in a community mental health team in the UK, was conducted. A service user advisory group was involved in all phases of the research cycle, including data collection, analysis, and dissemination. The results offer a detailed contextualized account of how medication decisions are made. For psychiatrists and service user participants SDM is seen as a way of enhancing service users' engagement in and control over treatment decisions. While psychiatrists value the transactional benefits of SDM, service user participants and psychiatric nurses conceptualize SDM as a long-term endeavor embedded within therapeutic partnerships. For service users these partnerships mitigate acknowledged problems of feeling unable to be fully involved during times of crisis. This study identified a range of barriers and facilitators to SDM concerning psychiatric medications from the lived experience of service users and the professional experience of clinicians. Furthermore, it indicates new potential intervention points to support SDM in psychiatric medication decisions.

Shared Decision-Making: An Autoethnography About Service User Perspectives in Making Choices About Mental Health Care and Treatment

Shared decision-making (SDM) between mental health medication prescribers and service users is a central pillar in the recovery approach, because it supports people experiencing mental ill-health to explore their care and treatment options to promote their well-being and to enable clinicians to gain knowledge of the choices the service user prefers. SDM is receiving increasing recognition both in the delivery of physical and mental health services; and as such, is of significance to current practice. As an expert-by-experience with over 30 years of receiving mental health treatment, I have made many choices about taking medication and accessing other forms of support. The experiences of SDM have been variable over my career as a service user: both encounters when I have felt utterly disempowered and interactions when I have led decision-making process based on my expertise-by-experience. In this article, I recount two experiences of exploring care and treatment options: firstly, a discharge planning meeting; and secondly, the choice to take medication over the long-term, despite the side effects. The article will explore both opportunities and barriers to effective shared decision-making, as well as skills and processes to facilitate this approach. The need to balance power between service users and professionals in this interaction is highlighted, including the need to respect expertise built on lived experience, alongside that of clinical expertise. This narrative is framed within an autoethnographic approach which allows me to contextualize my personal experiences in the wider environment of mental health care and support.

Improving treatment decision-making in bipolar II disorder: a phase II randomised controlled trial of an online patient decision-aid

BACKGROUND

Many patients with bipolar II disorder (BPII) prefer to be more informed and involved in their treatment decision-making than they currently are. Limited knowledge and involvement in one's treatment is also likely to compromise optimal BPII management. This Phase II RCT aimed to evaluate the acceptability, feasibility, and safety of a world-first patient decision-aid website (e-DA) to improve treatment decision-making regarding options for relapse prevention in BPII. The e-DA's potential efficacy in terms of improving quality of the decision-making process and quality of the decision made was also explored.

METHODS

The e-DA was based on International Patient Decision-Aid Standards and developed via an iterative co-design process. Adults with BPII diagnosis (n = 352) were recruited through a specialist outpatient clinical service and the social media of leading mental health organisations. Participants were randomised (1:1) to receive standard information with/without the e-DA (Intervention versus Control). At baseline (T0), post-treatment decision (T1) and at 3 months' post-decision follow-up (T2), participants completed a series of validated and purpose-designed questionnaires. Self-report and analytics data assessed the acceptability (e.g., perceived ease-of-use, usefulness; completed by Intervention participants only), safety (i.e., self-reported bipolar and/or anxiety symptoms), and feasibility of using the e-DA (% accessed). For all participants, questionnaires assessed constructs related to quality of the decision-making process (e.g., decisional conflict) and quality of the decision made (e.g., knowledge of treatment options and outcomes).

RESULTS

Intervention participants endorsed the e-DA as acceptable and feasible to use (82.1-94.6% item agreement); most self-reported using the e-DA either selectively (51.8%; relevant sections only) or thoroughly (34%). Exploratory analyses indicated the e-DA's potential efficacy to improve decision-making quality; most between-group standardised mean differences (SMD) were small-to-moderate. The largest potential effects were detected for objective treatment knowledge (- 0.69, 95% CIs - 1.04, - 0.33 at T1; and - 0.57, 95% CIs - 0.99,-0.14 at T2), decisional regret at T2 (0.42, 95% CIs 0.01, 0.84), preparation for decision-making at T1 (- 0.44, 95% CIs - 0.81, - 0.07), and the Decisional Conflict Scale Uncertainty subscale (0.42, 95% CIs 0.08, 0.08) and Total (0.36, 95% CIs 0.30, 0.69) scores, with all SMDs favouring the Intervention over the Control conditions. Regarding safety, e-DA use was not associated with worse bipolar symptoms or anxiety.

CONCLUSION

The e-DA appears to be acceptable, feasible, safe and potentially efficacious at improving patients' decision-making about BPII treatment. Findings also support the future adoption of the e-DA into patient care for BPII to foster treatment decisions based on the best available evidence and patient preferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12617000840381 (prospectively registered 07/06/2017).

Consumer and Family Perspectives to Achieve Mental Health Equity

Severe mental health disparities exist in the United States, with reduced access to community-based care and poorer recovery outcomes associated with people of color, women, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender individuals. One strategy to reduce these disparities is to incorporate the perspectives of mental health consumers and their families into care planning and delivery. Successful integration of personal experience with evidence-based interventions can help reduce stigma and improve retention in care. To leverage public policy to reduce mental health disparities, New York City has launched ThriveNYC, the nation's largest municipal-level investment in mental health.

Shared decision-making in serious mental illness: A comparative study

OBJECTIVE

To compare consumer and mental health professionals' (MHPs) preferences for decision-making in China and Europe.

METHODS

This study used cross-sectional design; Chinese data were collected by questionnaires and European data were obtained from the literature. Data were analysed using t-test, One-way ANOVA and Pearson correlation coefficient as appropriate.

RESULTS

This study involved 800 people diagnosed with severe mental illness and 506 MHPs. Chinese participants rated lower scores on preference for participation in decision-making (PD = 1.88) and information (IN = 2.70) than European participants (PD = 2.05, IN = 2.83). Chinese consumers rated a higher score on IN (2.78) but lower on for PD (1.75) than MHPs (IN = 2.64, PD = 1.97). Chinese consumers' education level is positively associated with preference for PD and IN. The gender, occupation and age of Chinese MHPs are associated with preference for PD.

CONCLUSION

Both Chinese and Europeans had preference for shared involvement in mental health, while the preference in China is less. Opinions of consumers and MHPs might be different, regarding the level of patient involvement in specific decisions.

PRACTICE IMPLICATION

It is essential that consumers' preferences are understood for provision of optimal support for a shared decision-making approach.

Using Open Questions to Understand 650 People's Experiences With Antipsychotic Drugs

Studies of antipsychotic medication, which are increasingly prescribed for a broad range of problems and circumstances, rarely ask the people who take them to describe their experiences with the drugs. In this study, 650 people, from 29 countries, responded, in an online survey, to "Overall in my life antipsychotic medications have been _____?" and "Is there anything else you would like to say, or emphasise, about your experiences with antipsychotic drugs?" Of the total participants, 14.3% were categorized as reporting purely positive experiences, 27.9% had mixed experiences, and 57.7% reported only negative ones. Negative experiences were positively correlated with age. Thematic analysis identified 749 negative, 180 positive, and 53 mixed statements. The 2 positive themes were "symptom reduction" (14) and "sleep" (14), with the majority (153) unspecified. The 4 negative themes (besides "unspecified"-191) were: "adverse effects" (316), "interactions with prescriber" (169), "withdrawal/difficult to get off them" (62), and "ineffective" (11). The adverse effects included: weight gain, emotional numbing, cognitive dysfunction, sedation, akathisia, effects on relationships, and suicidality. "Interactions with prescriber" included lack of information about withdrawal effects, support, or discussion of alternatives. The only mixed theme was "short-term good, long-term bad" (28). Open questions can add to findings from methodologies focused on symptom reduction. Clinicians should pay more attention to the need for respectful and collaborative patient-prescriber relationships. At the point of prescription, this must include providing the full range of information about antipsychotics, including potential benefits and harms, difficulties withdrawing, and information on alternatives treatments such as psychological therapies.

Discrepancy in Ratings of Shared Decision Making Between Patients and Health Professionals: A Cross Sectional Study in Mental Health Care

Background

A defined goal in mental health care is to increase the opportunities for patients to more actively participate in their treatment. This goal includes integrating aspects of user empowerment and shared decision-making (SDM) into treatment courses. To achieve this goal, more knowledge is needed about how patients and therapists perceive this integration.

Objective

To explore patient experiences of SDM, to describe differences between patient and therapist experiences, and to identify patient factors that might reduce SDM experiences for patients compared to the experiences of their therapists.

Methods

This cross-sectional study included 992 patients that had appointments with 267 therapists at Sørlandet Hospital, Division of Mental Health during a 1-week period. Both patients and therapists completed the CollaboRATE questionnaire, which was used to rate SDM experiences. Patients reported demographic and treatment-related information. Therapists provided clinical information.

Results

The analysis included 953 patient-therapist responder pairs that completed the CollaboRATE questionnaire. The mean SDM score was 80.7 (SD 20.8) among patients, and 86.6 (SD 12.1) among therapists. Females and patients that did not use medication for mental health disorders reported higher SDM scores than males and patients that used psychiatric medications (83.3 vs. 77.7; p < 0.001 and 82.6 vs. 79.8; p = 0.03, respectively). Patients with diagnoses involving psychotic symptoms reported lower SDM scores than all the other patients (66.8 vs. 82.3; p < 0.001). The probability that a patient would report lower SDM scores than their therapist was highest among patients that received involuntary treatment (OR 3.2, p = 0.02), patients with treatment durations longer than 2.2 years (OR 1.9, p = 0.001), and patients that required day care or in-patient care (OR 3.2, p = 0.01 and OR 3.2, p < 0.001, respectively).

Conclusion

We showed that both therapists and patients reported good SDM experiences in decisional situations, which indicated that SDM was implemented well. However, the SDM scores reported by in-patients and patients with prolonged or involuntary treatments were significantly lower than scores reported by their therapists. Our findings suggested that it remains a struggle in mental health care to establish a common understanding between patients and therapists in decisional processes regarding treatments for some patient groups.

Right care, first time: a highly personalised and measurement-based care model to manage youth mental health

Mood and psychotic syndromes most often emerge during adolescence and young adulthood, a period characterised by major physical and social change. Consequently, the effects of adolescent-onset mood and psychotic syndromes can have long term consequences. A key clinical challenge for youth mental health is to develop and test new systems that align with current evidence for comorbid presentations and underlying neurobiology, and are useful for predicting outcomes and guiding decisions regarding the provision of appropriate and effective care. Our highly personalised and measurement-based care model includes three core concepts: ▶ A multidimensional assessment and outcomes framework that includes: social and occupational function; self-harm, suicidal thoughts and behaviour; alcohol or other substance misuse; physical health; and illness trajectory. ▶ Clinical stage. ▶ Three common illness subtypes (psychosis, anxious depression, bipolar spectrum) based on proposed pathophysiological mechanisms (neurodevelopmental, hyperarousal, circadian). The model explicitly aims to prevent progression to more complex and severe forms of illness and is better aligned to contemporary models of the patterns of emergence of psychopathology. Inherent within this highly personalised approach is the incorporation of other evidence-based processes, including real-time measurement-based care as well as utilisation of multidisciplinary teams of health professionals. Data-driven local system modelling and personalised health information technologies provide crucial infrastructure support to these processes for better access to, and higher quality, mental health care for young people. CHAPTER 1: MULTIDIMENSIONAL OUTCOMES IN YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH CARE: WHAT MATTERS AND WHY?: Mood and psychotic syndromes present one of the most serious public health challenges that we face in the 21st century. Factors including prevalence, age of onset, and chronicity contribute to substantial burden and secondary risks such as alcohol or other substance misuse. Mood and psychotic syndromes most often emerge during adolescence and young adulthood, a period characterised by major physical and social change; thus, effects can have long term consequences. We propose five key domains which make up a multidimensional outcomes framework that aims to address the specific needs of young people presenting to health services with emerging mental illness. These include social and occupational function; self-harm, suicidal thoughts and behaviours; alcohol or other substance misuse; physical health; and illness type, stage and trajectory. Impairment and concurrent morbidity are well established in young people by the time they present for mental health care. Despite this, services and health professionals tend to focus on only one aspect of the presentation - illness type, stage and trajectory - and are often at odds with the preferences of young people and their families. There is a need to address the disconnect between mental health, physical health and social services and interventions, to ensure that youth mental health care focuses on the outcomes that matter to young people. CHAPTER 2: COMBINING CLINICAL STAGE AND PATHOPHYSIOLOGICAL MECHANISMS TO UNDERSTAND ILLNESS TRAJECTORIES IN YOUNG PEOPLE WITH EMERGING MOOD AND PSYCHOTIC SYNDROMES: Traditional diagnostic classification systems for mental disorders map poorly onto the early stages of illness experienced by young people, and purport categorical distinctions that are not readily supported by research into genetic, environmental and neurobiological risk factors. Consequently, a key clinical challenge in youth mental health is to develop and test new classification systems that align with current evidence on comorbid presentations, are consistent with current understanding of underlying neurobiology, and provide utility for predicting outcomes and guiding decisions regarding the provision of appropriate and effective care. This chapter outlines a transdiagnostic framework for classifying common adolescent-onset mood and psychotic syndromes, combining two independent but complementary dimensions: clinical staging, and three proposed pathophysiological mechanisms. Clinical staging reflects the progression of mental disorders and is in line with the concept used in general medicine, where more advanced stages are associated with a poorer prognosis and a need for more intensive interventions with a higher risk-to-benefit ratio. The three proposed pathophysiological mechanisms are neurodevelopmental abnormalities, hyperarousal and circadian dysfunction, which, over time, have illness trajectories (or pathways) to psychosis, anxious depression and bipolar spectrum disorders, respectively. The transdiagnostic framework has been evaluated in young people presenting to youth mental health clinics of the University of Sydney's Brain and Mind Centre, alongside a range of clinical and objective measures. Our research to date provides support for this framework, and we are now exploring its application to the development of more personalised models of care. CHAPTER 3: A COMPREHENSIVE ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK FOR YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH: GUIDING HIGHLY PERSONALISED AND MEASUREMENT-BASED CARE USING MULTIDIMENSIONAL AND OBJECTIVE MEASURES: There is an urgent need for improved care for young people with mental health problems, in particular those with subthreshold mental disorders that are not sufficiently severe to meet traditional diagnostic criteria. New comprehensive assessment frameworks are needed to capture the biopsychosocial profile of a young person to drive highly personalised and measurement-based mental health care. We present a range of multidimensional measures involving five key domains: social and occupational function; self-harm, suicidal thoughts and behaviours; alcohol or other substance misuse; physical health; and illness type, stage and trajectory. Objective measures include: neuropsychological function; sleep-wake behaviours and circadian rhythms; metabolic and immune markers; and brain structure and function. The recommended multidimensional measures facilitate the development of a comprehensive clinical picture. The objective measures help to further develop informative and novel insights into underlying pathophysiological mechanisms and illness trajectories to guide personalised care plans. A panel of specific multidimensional and objective measures are recommended as standard clinical practice, while others are recommended secondarily to provide deeper insights with the aim of revealing alternative clinical paths for targeted interventions and treatments matched to the clinical stage and proposed pathophysiological mechanisms of the young person. CHAPTER 4: PERSONALISING CARE OPTIONS IN YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH: USING MULTIDIMENSIONAL ASSESSMENT, CLINICAL STAGE, PATHOPHYSIOLOGICAL MECHANISMS, AND INDIVIDUAL ILLNESS TRAJECTORIES TO GUIDE TREATMENT SELECTION: New models of mental health care for young people require that interventions be matched to illness type, clinical stage, underlying pathophysiological mechanisms and individual illness trajectories. Narrow syndrome-focused classifications often direct clinical attention away from other key factors such as functional impairment, self-harm and suicidality, alcohol or other substance misuse, and poor physical health. By contrast, we outline a treatment selection guide for early intervention for adolescent-onset mood and psychotic syndromes (ie, active treatments and indicated and more specific secondary prevention strategies). This guide is based on experiences with the Brain and Mind Centre's highly personalised and measurement-based care model to manage youth mental health. The model incorporates three complementary core concepts: ▶A multidimensional assessment and outcomes framework including: social and occupational function; self-harm, suicidal thoughts and behaviours; alcohol or other substance misuse; physical health; and illness trajectory. ▶Clinical stage. ▶Three common illness subtypes (psychosis, anxious depression, bipolar spectrum) based on three underlying pathophysiological mechanisms (neurodevelopmental, hyperarousal, circadian). These core concepts are not mutually exclusive and together may facilitate improved outcomes through a clinical stage-appropriate and transdiagnostic framework that helps guide decisions regarding the provision of appropriate and effective care options. Given its emphasis on adolescent-onset mood and psychotic syndromes, the Brain and Mind Centre's model of care also respects a fundamental developmental perspective - categorising childhood problems (eg, anxiety and neurodevelopmental difficulties) as risk factors and respecting the fact that young people are in a period of major biological and social transition. Based on these factors, a range of social, psychological and pharmacological interventions are recommended, with an emphasis on balancing the personal benefit-to-cost ratio. CHAPTER 5: A SERVICE DELIVERY MODEL TO SUPPORT HIGHLY PERSONALISED AND MEASUREMENT-BASED CARE IN YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH: Over the past decade, we have seen a growing focus on creating mental health service delivery models that better meet the unique needs of young Australians. Recent policy directives from the Australian Government recommend the adoption of stepped-care services to improve the appropriateness of care, determined by severity of need. Here, we propose that a highly personalised approach enhances stepped-care models by incorporating clinical staging and a young person's current and multidimensional needs. It explicitly aims to prevent progression to more complex and severe forms of illness and is better aligned to contemporary models of the patterns of emergence of psychopathology. Inherent within a highly personalised approach is the incorporation of other evidence-based processes, including real-time measurement-based care and use of multidisciplinary teams of health professionals. Data-driven local system modelling and personalised health information technologies provide crucial infrastructure support to these processes for better access to, and higher quality of, mental health care for young people.

Experiences of taking neuroleptic medication and impacts on symptoms, sense of self and agency: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative data

PURPOSE

Neuroleptic (antipsychotic) drugs reduce psychotic symptoms, but how they achieve these effects and how the drugs' effects are experienced by people who take them are less well understood. The present study describes a synthesis of qualitative data about mental and behavioural alterations associated with taking neuroleptics and how these interact with symptoms of psychosis and people's sense of self and agency.

METHODS

Nine databases were searched to identify qualitative literature concerning experiences of taking neuroleptic medication. A thematic synthesis was conducted.

RESULTS

Neuroleptics were commonly experienced as producing a distinctive state of lethargy, cognitive slowing, emotional blunting and reduced motivation, which impaired functioning but also had beneficial effects on symptoms of psychosis and some other symptoms (e.g. insomnia). For some people, symptom reduction helped restore a sense of normality and autonomy, but others experienced a loss of important aspects of their personality. Across studies, many people adopted a passive stance towards long-term medication, expressing a sense of resignation, endurance or loss of autonomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Neuroleptic drugs modify cognition, emotions and motivation. These effects may be associated with reducing the intensity and impact of symptoms, but also affect people's sense of self and agency. Understanding how the effects of neuroleptics are experienced by those who take them is important in developing a more collaborative approach to drug treatment in psychosis and schizophrenia.

Implementing a collaborative model in health education practice: a process evaluation of a health education programme targeting users with mental health problems

Background

Users with mental health problems (users) have a substantially higher risk of developing type 2 diabetes than the general population. Recent studies show that traditional lifestyle interventions focusing solely on exercise and diet among users have limited effect. Studies suggest collaborative models as a starting point for health behaviour change are more beneficial, but implementation in practice is a challenge. Using the Medical Research Council’s guidance for process evaluation, we explored implementation of a collaborative model in health education activities targeting users. The collaborative model focused on involving users in agenda setting and reflection about readiness to change health behaviour and was supported by dialogue tools (e.g., quotes and games). Educators received 3 days of training in applying the model.

Methods

Collected data included questionnaires for users (n = 154) and professionals (n = 158), interviews with users (n = 14), and observations of health education activities (n = 37) and the professional development programme (n = 9). Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and systematic text condensation.

Results

Ninetysix percent (152) of professionals tested the model in practice and tried at least one tool. Users reported that the model supported them in expressing their thoughts about their health and focused on their needs rather than the agenda of the professional. Ninetythree percent (143) of users strongly agreed that professionals were open-minded and responsive. However, observations showed that some professionals overlooked cues from users about motivation for health behaviour change. Furthermore, professionals identified lack of involvement from their managers as a barrier to implementation.

Conclusions

Implementation of a collaborative model was feasible in practice. Training of professionals in active listening and involvement of managers prior to implementation is crucial.

Assessment of adherence to oral antipsychotic medications: What has changed over the past decade?

INTRODUCTION

In a previous review, spanning 3 decades, we found that self-report and other non-objective measures were the primary means of assessing adherence to oral antipsychotic medications for individuals with schizophrenia. Moreover, consensus regarding the definition of adherence was completely lacking. Here, we examined the next decade of studies to determine what may have changed.

METHOD

We searched the peer reviewed literature published between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2017 using Google scholar, Science Direct, CINAHL, PsychINFO, PsychARTICLES and Medline. Search terms were medication adherence or medication compliance or medication acceptance or medication follow-through or medication concordance or medication persistence AND schizophrenia. We included articles that assessed adherence behavior.

RESULTS

The search yielded 663 articles, 363 of these were eliminated. Included studies represent over 560,000 individuals. Definitions of adherence remain variable with cutoffs from 67% to 95%. Subjective measures of adherence remain the most commonly used. However, the use of objective measures has significantly increased, as has the use of electronic claims data. However, the absolute number of studies using objective measures remains low and very few approaches identify the amount of medication actually taken.

CONCLUSIONS

Some movement toward more standardization and the use of more objective measures of adherence has been made over the past decade. However, objective measures continue to be underutilized and definitions remain variable. Assessing adherence in less than optimal ways calls into question the results of studies purporting to identify reasons for problem adherence and to elucidate the relationships among adherence and other variables.

The role of shared decision-making in improving adherence to pharmacological treatments in patients with schizophrenia: a clinical review

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a process in which the doctor provides clear and complete medical information to patients about their treatment, and patients provide information on his/her preferences. Patients and clinicians bring different, but equally important, knowledge to the decision-making process. Through the adoption of SDM, it should be possible to overcome the barriers that hinder the acceptance of long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) by patients, and often also by psychiatrists. The present paper is a critical appraisal of recent literature on the impact of SDM in improving adherence to pharmacological treatments and in implementing the use of LAIs in the treatment of patients with schizophrenia. SDM is recognized as a promising strategy to improve collaboration between clinicians and patients in achieving recovery. When considering drug treatments, clinicians must evaluate the patient's preferences, expectations and concerns towards the development of a personalized treatment strategy. Moreover, an active involvement in the decision process could reduce the patient's perception of being coerced into the use of LAIs. Involving patients in the choice of therapy is not sufficient to increase pharmacological adherence if, at the same time, there is no constant work of comparison and communication with the reference psychiatric team. SDM can be particularly effective for LAI prescription, since patient can have prejudices and unjustified fears related to the LAI formulation, which the doctor must resolve.

Practitioners' positive attitudes promote shared decision-making in mental health care

RATIONALE AND AIMS

There is a growing expectation of implementing shared decision making (SDM) in today's health care service, including mental health care. Traditional understanding of SDM may be too narrow to capture the complexity of treatments of mental health problems. Although the patients' contribution to SDM is well described, the contribution from the health care practitioners is less explored. Therefore, our aim was to explore the attitudes of practitioners in mental health care and the associations between practitioners' attitudes and SDM.

METHOD

We performed a cross-sectional study where practitioners reported their sharing and caring attitudes on the Patient-Practitioner Orientation Scale (PPOS) and age, gender, profession, and clinical working site. The patients reported SDM using the CollaboRate tool. We used a mixed effect model linking the data from each practitioner to one or more patients. We presented the findings and used them as background for a more philosophic reflection.

RESULTS

We included 312 practitioners with mean age 46.1 years. Of the practitioners, 60 held a medical doctors degree, 97 were psychologists, and 127 held a college degree in nursing, social science, or pedagogy. Female practitioners reported higher sharing (4.79 vs 4.67 [range 1-6], P = .04) and caring scores (4.77 vs 4.65 [range 1-6], P = .02) than males. The regression model contained 206 practitioners and 772 patients. We found a higher probability for the patient to report high SDM score if the practitioner reported higher sharing scores, and lower probability if the practitioner worked in ambulatory care.

CONCLUSIONS

SDM in mental health care is complex and demands multifaceted preparations from practitioners as well as patients. The practitioners' attitudes are not sufficiently explored using one instrument. The positive association between practitioners' patient-centred attitudes and SDM found in this study implies a relevance of the practitioners' attitudes for accomplishment of SDM processes in mental health care.

Shared decision-making in outpatients with mental disorders: Patients´ preferences and associated factors

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Over the last years, traditional paternalistic model is being questioned. Shared Decision-Making (SDM) model has been proposed as a way to improve patient-physician interaction. Little is known to what extent people with severe mental illness want to be involved in decision-making process. This study evaluates their preferences about making clinical decisions and which variables influence these desires.

METHOD

One hundred seven patients with DSM diagnoses of bipolar disorder or schizophrenia and 100 Non Psychiatric Comparison (NPC) subjects recruited from mental health and primary care departments completed a self-reported questionnaire about preferences in decision-making process. Demographic and clinical information was obtained through review of available records and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS).

RESULTS

Patients and NPCs differed as regards their preferences about their participation in medical decisions. NPCs were 18 times more likely to prefer options about their treatment and 2 times more likely to prefer to take medical decisions by their own than psychiatric patients. The best predictors of the preference of a SDM model were a lower BPRS global score and the absence of previous compulsory admissions.

CONCLUSIONS

Psychiatric patients more frequently preferred a passive role in the decision-making process. Interventions to promote SDM should be tailored to the values and needs of each patient because not everyone wants to participate to the same degree. We found several factors to take into account in patient engagement in SDM as these populations may be more vulnerable.

Experiences of psychotropic medication use and decision-making for adults with intellectual disability: a multistakeholder qualitative study in the UK

OBJECTIVES

Understanding patient and carer perspectives is essential to improving the quality of medication prescribing. This study aimed to explore experiences of psychotropic medication use among people with intellectual disability (ID) and their carers, with a focus on how medication decisions are made.

DESIGN

Thematic analysis of data collected in individual semistructured interviews.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING

Fourteen adults with ID, 12 family carers and 12 paid carers were recruited from specialist psychiatry services, community groups, care providers and training organisations in the UK.

RESULTS

People with ID reported being highly compliant with psychotropic medication, based on a largely unquestioned view of medication as important and necessary, and belief in the authority of the psychiatrist. Though they sometimes experienced medication negatively, they were generally not aware of their right to be involved in medication decisions. Paid and family carers reported undertaking a number of medication-related activities. Their 'front-line' status and longevity of relationships meant that carers felt they possessed important forms of knowledge relevant to medication decisions. Both groups of carers valued decision-making in which they felt they had a voice and a genuine role. While some in each group described making joint decisions about medication with psychiatrists, lack of involvement was often described. This took three forms in participants' accounts: being uninformed of important facts, insufficiently included in discussions and lacking influence to shape decisions. Participants described efforts to democratise the decision-making process by gathering information, acting to disrupt perceived power asymmetries and attempting to prove their credibility as valid decision-making partners.

CONCLUSIONS

Stakeholder involvement is a key element of medication optimisation that is not always experienced in decisions about psychotropic medication for people with ID. Forms of shared decision-making could be developed to promote collaboration and offer people with ID and their carers greater involvement in medication decisions.

Making decisions about antipsychotics: a qualitative study of patient experience and the development of a decision aid

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making is a widely accepted standard of patient-centred care that leads to improved clinical outcomes, yet it is commonly underutilised in the field of mental health. Furthermore, little is known regarding patient decision making around antipsychotic medication, which is often poorly adhered to. We aim to explore psychiatric patients' experiences of antipsychotic medication decision making in order to develop a patient decision aid to promote shared decision making.

METHODS

Focus groups were conducted with patients with chronic psychotic illnesses (n = 20) who had previously made a decision about taking or changing antipsychotic medication. Transcripts were coded and analysed for thematic content and continued until thematic saturation. These themes subsequently informed the development of a decision aid with the help of expert guidance. Further patient input was sought using the think aloud method (n = 3).

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients participated in the study. Thematic analysis revealed that 'adverse effects' was the most common theme identified by patients surrounding antipsychotic medication decision-making followed by 'mode and time of administration', 'symptom control' and 'autonomy'. The final decision aid is included to provoke further discussion and development of such aids.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients commonly report negative experiences of antipsychotic medication, in particular side-effects, which remain critical to future decision making around antipsychotic medication. Clinical encounters that increase patient knowledge and maximise autonomy in order to prevent early negative experiences with antipsychotic medication are likely to be beneficial.

Self-Determination and Choice in Mental Health: Qualitative Insights From a Study of Self-Directed Care

SELF-DETERMINATION AND CHOICE IN MENTAL HEALTH.

Giving Patients Choices During Involuntary Admission: A New Intervention

Background: People who receive involuntary treatment are some of the most vulnerable in psychiatric services. They are more likely to have poorer social and clinical outcomes and to be disillusioned with and disengaged from care. Research indicates that patients' experience in the first week of involuntary treatment is a critical period: a better experience of care in the first week predicts better quality of life and reduced readmission 1 year later. Patients have identified involvement in clinical decisions as key to improving their experience of care. The aim of this study was to test the feasibility and acceptability of an intervention to facilitate involvement in decision making for involuntary inpatients called OPeNS (Options, Preferences, Negotiate, and Summarise). Methods: This was a mixed method study. The OPeNS intervention was developed based on previous research carried out by a multidisciplinary team. Clinicians were trained to deliver it to involuntary inpatients. Feasibility indices (rates of participation in the intervention and time required to deliver it) were collected. Patients (N = 14) and clinicians (N = 5) provided qualitative data on their experience of the intervention in semi-structured interviews which were analysed using thematic analysis. Results: The OPeNS intervention was found to be acceptable by both patients and clinicians and feasible to conduct within the first week of involuntary treatment. Patients' and clinicians' experiences of the intervention fall into two themes: 'Enabling a different dynamic' and 'Clashing with usual practices and priorities'. Conclusion: The OPeNS intervention provides a structure that can be used by clinicians across disciplines to facilitate involving involuntary patients in decision making. Although challenges related to changing usual practices were identified, the intervention was received positively and was feasible to conduct in the first week of involuntary treatment.

Mental health professionals' views and experiences of antipsychotic reduction and discontinuation

Background

The widely established treatment for psychosis is long-term antipsychotic medication. However, many people stop taking this treatment, and request other options. There are also growing concerns about adverse effects, but currently no professional guidelines to support reducing or stopping these drugs. The views and experiences of individual mental health professionals around reducing and stopping antipsychotics are therefore crucial in treatment decisions.

Methods

We conducted 7 focus groups with prescribing psychiatrists and other members of community-based statutory mental health services in London. Participants discussed their views about, experiences, and processes of antipsychotic reduction and discontinuation. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

Results

Participants acknowledged that antipsychotics can have severe adverse effects. They were generally supportive of trying to reduce these drugs to the lowest effective dose, although stopping antipsychotics was less acceptable. Prior experiences of adverse events after reduction or discontinuation meant that both were approached with caution. Reduction was also reported to be hampered by organisational and knowledge barriers. Lack of resources, pressure to discharge, and poor continuity of care were seen as organisational barriers. Knowledge barriers included inadequate evidence about who might be best suited to reduction, and lack of guidance about how this could be done safely. This meant that reduction was often prompted by patients, and sometimes actively discouraged, and stability with maintenance treatment was often favoured.

Conclusions

Concerns about risk and other barriers means that clinicians are often reluctant to implement reduction or discontinuation of antipsychotic medication. In order to increase the treatment options available to service users, more research and guidance on how to minimise the risks of antipsychotic reduction and discontinuation is required to enable clinicians to engage more constructively with service users requests, offering people more choice and control in managing their mental health condition.

Why and How Family Caregivers Should Participate in Shared Decision Making in Mental Health

Patient involvement (shared decision making ) and caregiver involvement (family involvement, etc.) are mostly seen as different aspects of care, and efforts to integrate them are limited. This Open Forum posits that both approaches are critical and that caregiver involvement should always be considered during shared decision making, potentially as an integral component. The authors argue that the two approaches can overlap and work synergistically rather than antagonistically. When caregiver involvement is integrated into shared decision making, caregivers may assume any of a variety of roles and need to develop certain competencies to better engage in decision making.