Suchergebnisse

Background: While formalised mental health peer support is on the increase, there continues to be a lack of consensus regarding the peer supporter role. Aim: The aim was to develop consensus on the essential components, personal costs, personal benefits, barriers and facilitators involved in providing mental health peer support. Methods: The Delphi method was used. In the first round, an exhaustive list of statements pertaining to peer support was generated from literature review and consultation with experienced peer supporters. In the second round, 147 UK peer supporters rated statements online or via post, and completed a questionnaire about experiences of providing peer support. Criteria for consensus were applied. Where there was uncertainty, statements were re-rated. Descriptive statistics and group comparisons were calculated. The final statements were grouped thematically. Results: Consensus was reached on statements pertaining to essential components ( n = 67), personal benefits ( n = 21), barriers ( n = 1) and facilitators ( n = 35). Formal peer support involves many skills and competencies. Most participants agreed that a wide range of personal benefits come with the role. Organisations may facilitate peer support through their values, actions and oversight. Approximately half of the sample worked in public services and were more likely to have concerns regarding pay and career progression. Conclusion and Implications for Practice: Results define the peer supporter role and add to the knowledge base about optimal conditions for it to thrive. Recommendations are made regarding role development and career progression, and future research to better understand personal costs and benefits.

Background Carers are key providers of care and support to mental health patients and mental health policies consistently mandate carer involvement. Understanding carers' experiences of and views about assessment for involuntary admission and subsequent detention is crucial to efforts to improve policy and practice. Aims We aimed to synthesise qualitative evidence of carers' experiences of the assessment and detention of their family and friends under mental health legislation. Method We searched five bibliographic databases, reference lists and citations. Studies were included if they collected data using qualitative methods and the patients were aged 18 or older; reported on carer experiences of assessment or detention under mental health legislation anywhere in the world; and were published in peer-reviewed journals. We used meta-synthesis. Results The review included 23 papers. Themes were consistent across time and setting and related to the emotional impact of detention; the availability of support for carers; the extent to which carers felt involved in decision-making; relationships with patients and staff during detention; and the quality of care provided to patients. Carers often described conflicting feelings of relief coupled with distress and anxiety about how the patient might cope and respond. Carers also spoke about the need for timely and accessible information, supportive and trusting relationships with mental health professionals, and of involvement as partners in care. Conclusions Research is needed to explore whether and how health service and other interventions can improve the involvement and support of carers prior to, during and after the detention of family members and friends.

BACKGROUND: Carers are key providers of care and support to mental health patients and mental health policies consistently mandate carer involvement. Understanding carers' experiences of and views about assessment for involuntary admission and subsequent detention is crucial to efforts to improve policy and practice. AIMS: We aimed to synthesise qualitative evidence of carers' experiences of the assessment and detention of their family and friends under mental health legislation. METHOD: We searched five bibliographic databases, reference lists and citations. Studies were included if they collected data using qualitative methods and the patients were aged 18 or older; reported on carer experiences of assessment or detention under mental health legislation anywhere in the world; and were published in peer-reviewed journals. We used meta-synthesis. RESULTS: The review included 23 papers. Themes were consistent across time and setting and related to the emotional impact of detention; the availability of support for carers; the extent to which carers felt involved in decision-making; relationships with patients and staff during detention; and the quality of care provided to patients. Carers often described conflicting feelings of relief coupled with distress and anxiety about how the patient might cope and respond. Carers also spoke about the need for timely and accessible information, supportive and trusting relationships with mental health professionals, and of involvement as partners in care. CONCLUSIONS: Research is needed to explore whether and how health service and other interventions can improve the involvement and support of carers prior to, during and after the detention of family members and friends.