Perspectives of people with schizophrenia on clinical outcome scales and patient-reported outcome measures: a qualitative study

Author:

Sawada Utako1,Matsunaga Asami2,Taneda Ayano3,Sasaki Natsu1,Yamaguchi Sosei4

Affiliation:

1. University of Tokyo

2. Tokyo Medical and Dental University

3. Kanagawa University of Human Services

4. National Center of Neurology and Psychiatry

Abstract

Abstract Background Over the past half-century, numerous scales have been designed to quantify outcomes in people with severe mental health disorders. However, little is known about the views of people diagnosed with schizophrenia regarding individual outcome scales, particularly outside of European countries. Aim We conducted this qualitative study to examine people with schizophrenia perspectives concerning multiple scales in Japan. Methods There were 11 participants in this study. There were some had extensive experience as mental health peer supporters and others had no such experience. To address potential power imbalances and facilitate dynamic discourse, participants were intentionally divided into two groups - peer support experience and without - and conducted simultaneous two-hour focus group interviews in separate rooms. Participants reviewed 12 clinical and patient-reported outcome measures and discussed their views on each measure. Interview data for each group were combined prior to analysis and qualitatively analyzed by four researchers using a thematic analysis approach. Results The average age of the participants was 42.7 years (SD = 8.3), and six were male. On average, the participants had been living with schizophrenia for 22.2 years (SD = 11.1). After analyzing the interview data, the following five themes were identified, each containing two to seven subthemes: A) validity and format of the scale construct, B) factors affecting the accuracy of responses, C) plain language and familiar words in Japanese culture, D) psychological impact on the respondents, and E) containing important items in the life of people with schizophrenia. Conclusion The participants provided both favorable and unfavorable feedback regarding each scale. When implementing research utilizing clinical outcome scales and patient-reported outcome measures, researchers must exercise caution considering the potential emotional impact on respondents. Furthermore, scale development should take into account the cultural background and psychological burden experienced by the respondents.

Publisher

Research Square Platform LLC

Reference49 articles.

1. New trends in assessing the outcomes of mental health interventions;Thornicroft G;World Psychiatry,2014

2. Recovery: an international perspective;Slade M;Epidemiol Psychiatric Sci,2008

3. Interrater reliability of the Japanese version of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale and the appraisal of its training effect;Igarashi Y;J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci,1998

4. The positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS) for schizophrenia;Kay SR;Schizophr Bull,1987

5. A brief mental health outcome scale: Reliability and validity of the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF);Jones SH;Br J Psychiatry,1995

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3