Experiences of Clients and Professionals with the Recovery Oriented Intake-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Experiences of Clients and Professionals with the Recovery Oriented Intake

Published:2024-02-24 Issue:5 Volume:60 Page:985-996
ISSN:0010-3853
Container-title:Community Mental Health Journal
language:en
Short-container-title:Community Ment Health J

Author:

Engelsbel Fabiana^ORCID,Waterhout Nanette,Dijkstra Marty,Keet René,Nugter Annet

Abstract

AbstractThe Recovery Oriented Intake (ROI) integrates recovery principles from the start of treatment, and involves peer experts, unlike the intake as usual (IAU). This study compared experiences with ROI and IAU among 127 clients and 391 professionals, consisting of practitioners and peer experts. Intake’s quality, measured with questionnaires, showed no differences in experiences between ROI and IAU clients. However, practitioners experienced ROI as more recovery-oriented than IAU. The ROI Fidelity Check (RFC) revealed that clients’ RFC-scores, but not practitioners’, predicted their valuation of intake’s quality. This underscores the need for (re)training and peer supervision for professionals to ensure adherence to ROI’s principles. Discrepancies between clients’ and professionals’ experiences at the start of treatment are consistent with literature on working alliance and Shared Decision Making (SDM). Differences between ROI and IAU professionals may stem from heightened awareness of recovery principles due to training and the presence of peer experts during intake.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Link

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10597-024-01250-1.pdf

Reference30 articles.

1. Carrotte, E. R., Hartup, M. E., Lee-Bates, B., & Blanchard, M. (2021). I Think That Everybody Should Be Involved: What Informs Experiences of Shared Decision-Making in Supporting People Living with Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders? Patient Education and Counseling, 104(7), 1583–1590. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2020.11.012. Epub 2020 Nov 11. PMID: 33229188.

2. Deegan, P. E. (2007). The lived experience of using psychiatric medication in the recovery process and a shared decision-making program to support it. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 31(1), 62–69. https://doi.org/10.2975/31.1.2007.62.69.

3. Drake, R. E., Deegan, P. E., & Rapp, C. (2010). The promise of shared decision making in mental health. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 34(1), 7–13. https://doi.org/10.2975/34.1.2010.7.13.

4. Drivenes, K., Haaland, V., Hauge, Y. L., Vederhus, J. K., Irgens, A. C., Solli, K. K., Regevik, H., Falk, R. S., & Tanum, L. (2020). Discrepancy in ratings of shared decision making between patients and health professionals: A cross sectional study in mental health care. Frontiers in Psychology, 24(11), 443. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00443PMID: 32265780; PMCID: PMC7108784.

5. Elwyn, G., Frosch, D., Thomson, R., Joseph-Williams, N., Lloyd, A., Kinnersley, P., Cording, E., Tomson, D., Dodd, C., Rollnick, S., Edwards, A., & Barry, M. (2012). Shared decision making: A model for clinical practice. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 27(10), 1361–1367. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-012-2077-6.