Search

Risk management which assesses and mitigates risks such as suicide and violence is under scrutiny, particularly within psychiatric inpatient settings. Restrictive practices, which result from risk assessment, such as observations, physical restraint and ward seclusion can impact negatively on patient recovery, hindering abilities to develop a meaningful life that emphasizes purpose, hope and autonomy, despite experiencing mental distress. Yet, less is known about the impact from the patient's perspective when first admitted to hospital, a period which among other reasons may come with increasing risk management practices owing to the clinical uncertainties about patient risks. In this grounded theory study, we explore the impact on recovery, interviewing 15 adult participants with patient experiences of being in an acute hospital. The main theme of the study, termed a core category with a grounded theory, was identified as "ontological insecurity of inattentiveness". This highlighted a staff inattentiveness with involving patients with risk management and explaining the purposes of the practice, which raised insecurities about what was happening to the patients when admitted to hospital. Four subcategories support the core category; discounting the patients' experiences to gain a meaningful grasp of risk management, ambiguity about risk management rules, particularly the reasons around their use, forebodingness to the hospital environment and, management from afar, with patients feeling scrutinized from observations without a voice to offer different views. It is hoped these findings will add to the field of patient involvement in psychiatric inpatient settings, proposing attempts to raise understanding and inclusivity of risk management, starting when first admitted to hospital. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The strengths of model of case management is a recovery‐oriented model of community mental health care that has been linked to positive consumer outcomes. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore the consumer perspective of the strengths model of case management using a descriptive phenomenological approach. Data were collected through in‐depth, semi‐structured interviews. In total, six consumers from a metropolitan community mental health service were interviewed. Interview transcripts were analysed using Colaizzi's phenomenological method. Three major themes were identified: the relationship between the consumer and the case manager is valuable, the strengths assessment supports identifying strengths and areas for action and the strengths model of case management promotes recovery and goal achievement. Implications for practice include an increased understanding of consumer preferences and promoting the consumer voice, thereby supporting the provision of higher quality evidence‐based practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Goal‐setting is a tool that empowers consumer recovery. Though the pandemic has affected consumer goal‐setting, the nature and extent of this impact have not been examined in a recovery setting. The aim of this study is to assess whether the recovery goals of individuals with serious mental illness changed in association with the COVID‐19 pandemic. In this mixed‐methods design, data were collected from a purposeful sample of consumers (nTOTAL = 355) aged 19–67 years (MAGE = 44.56, SD = 13.05) attending Recovery Camp, a 5‐day therapeutic‐recreation programme for individuals living with severe mental illness (e.g., PTSD, schizophrenia). Consumer‐set goals were examined across 5 programmes prior to March 2020 (nPRE = 126) and 11 following (nPOST = 229). Goals were set on day one, with attainment self‐scored on day five. Chi‐squared goodness‐of‐fit tests compared goal proportions per domain; tests of independence assessed changes in goals pre‐ and post‐pandemic. Six goal domains were identified: Approach‐Based Recovery, Avoidance‐based Recovery, Novel Physical Activities, Relationships, Health, and Recreation/Relaxation. Irrespective of the pandemic, goal attainment was consistently high across all programmes (86.56%). Approach‐based Recovery goals were predominant pre‐pandemic, but were significantly reduced post‐pandemic (p = 0.040). Goals related to Relationships and Novel Physical Activities took precedence throughout the pandemic. Post‐COVID‐19, consumer recovery goals reveal increased desire for connection, novelty‐seeking, and positive behavioural change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]