Cargando…

Shared decision-making for psychiatric medication: A mixed-methods evaluation of a UK training programme for service users and clinicians

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making (SDM) is recognised as a promising strategy to enhance good collaboration between clinicians and service users, yet it is not practised regularly in mental health. AIMS: Develop and evaluate a novel training programme to enhance SDM in psychiatric medication manage...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ramon, Shulamit, Morant, Nicola, Stead, Ute, Perry, Ben
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5697562/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29067837
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0020764017733764
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Shared decision making (SDM) is recognised as a promising strategy to enhance good collaboration between clinicians and service users, yet it is not practised regularly in mental health. AIMS: Develop and evaluate a novel training programme to enhance SDM in psychiatric medication management for service users, psychiatrists and care co-ordinators. METHODS: The training programme design was informed by existing literature and local stakeholders consultations. Parallel group-based training programmes on SDM process were delivered to community mental health service users and providers. Evaluation consisted of quantitative measures at baseline and 12-month follow-up, post-programme participant feedback and qualitative interviews. RESULTS: Training was provided to 47 service users, 35 care-coordinators and 12 psychiatrists. Participant feedback was generally positive. Statistically significant changes in service users’ decisional conflict and perceptions of practitioners’ interactional style in promoting SDM occurred at the follow-up. Qualitative data suggested positive impacts on service users’ and care co-ordinators confidence to explore medication experience, and group-based training was valued. CONCLUSIONS: The programme was generally acceptable to service users and practitioners. This indicates the value of conducting a larger study and exploring application for non-medical decisions.