Implementation of the Recovery Guide in inpatient mental health services in Sweden—A process evaluation study

Bibliographic Data

ID19505838
AuthorsUlrika Bejerholm (0000-0001-7505-6955, Department of Health Sciences, Centre of Evidence‐Based Psychosocial Interventions, CEPI Lund University Lund Sweden, corresponding author), Conny Allaskog (The Swedish Partnership for Mental Health, NSPH Skåne Sweden), Jessica Andersson (The Swedish Partnership for Mental Health, NSPH Skåne Sweden), Linda Nordström (The Swedish Partnership for Mental Health, NSPH Skåne Sweden), D Roe (0000-0002-6197-0989, Department of Health Sciences, Centre of Evidence‐Based Psychosocial Interventions, CEPI Lund University Lund Sweden)
Year2022
Volume25
Issue4
Pages1405-1417
Publication date2022-08-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueHealth Expectations (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1369-6513 • E-ISSN: 1369-7625
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/hex.13480
PMID35340092
OpenAlexW4220911650
LanguageEN
Citations received4
References cited33

BACKGROUND: Involving service users in inpatient care and recovery planning has gained interest worldwide. Our purpose was to evaluate the process of implementation of a coproduced Recovery Guide (RG) intervention in 22 inpatient wards in Sweden, in terms of context, implementation process and mechanisms of impact over 12 months. METHODS: A mixed method design and a process evaluation framework were used to guide data collection and to deductively analyze perspectives and descriptive statistics of delivery from three stakeholder groups. RESULTS: Results showed that although initial contextual barriers were present (e.g., lack of resources, and interest, uncertainty in the organization, a dominant illness perspective), it was possible to implement the RG in 14 wards, where 53% of admitted service users received the intervention. Legitimacy of the intervention, engaged managers and staff, capacity of staff and ward organization, coproduction and continuous support from user organization were critical mediators. Mechanisms of impact concerned (1) a new perspective on mental health, well-being and recovery, (2) capacity building of a recovery approach in inpatient settings and (3) a meaningful outlet for users' thoughts and feelings on recovery, sharing narratives and influencing care and goals. CONCLUSIONS: The RG intervention has the potential to promote a recovery approach in inpatient mental health services (MHSs). Coproduction among stakeholders created trust and a sustainable implementation that made it possible for wards to resume implementation when contextual barriers had been resolved. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The current study involved stakeholders including a service user organization, the public, first-line managers and staff (including peer support workers) in inpatient and community MHS and researchers, who greatly contributed to the implementation programme, including codesign of the RG intervention as well as coproduction of the implementation in inpatient MHS. All authors have their own lived experiences of mental health problems as a service user or as a relative

Coproduction · Health care · Inpatient care · Mental health · Political science · Psychiatry · Psychological intervention · Public relations · Stakeholder · Computer Science · Healthcare innovation and challenges · Medicine · Mental Health and Patient Involvement · Nursing · Psychiatric care and mental health services · Psychology

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access