Search

Background: Starting in the 1990s in the United States, individuals with lived experience of mental health crises and recovery have been employed as peer support workers (PSWs) internationally. However, the implementation of PSW in clinical contexts remains challenging. Methods: This manuscript presents and discusses the methodological framework of the ImpPeer‐Psy5 study on the PSW implementation in the German mental healthcare sector. This study used a mixed‐methods and collaborative research approach, as well as participatory research strategies. After describing the study design, populations, teamwork and assessments, the epistemic challenges of its methodological framework will be critically discussed and how it has iteratively shaped the object of study. Discussion and Practical Implications: The healthcare, policy and funding context of PSW implementation as well as the study's methodological framework have differently influenced the ways in which the implementation of PSW has been conceived in this study. The choice of a collaborative or participatory methodological framework is advised to better align research questions and procedures to the specific needs and challenges of PSWs and other stakeholders concerned with PSW implementation. Patient and Public Contribution: The research team of the ImpPeer‐Psy5 study was collaboratively staffed by a portion of researchers who also identify as users or survivors of psychiatric services. A nonprofit organization for the training of PSWs served as a practice partner throughout the research process. Different participatory formats involve a significant number of diverse stakeholders relevant to PSW implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Crisis intervention teams in Berlin, Germany use a form of dialogic practice – a therapeutic approach based on the relational meaning of language – to develop an alternative means of negotiating risk and evaluating "outcome" in psychiatric experience. These clinicians bring familial networks into the process of crisis management, revealing meaningful "outcomes" regarding crisis care to be tethered to local concepts of chronicity and responsibility. To conceive of outcome in this context requires attention beyond the individual, and instead the consideration of a distributed outcome, in which living with risk, and its consequences, is bound to the collective experience of the network. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The well-known divergence between what policy and protocol look like on paper, and what happens in the actual practice of daily life remains a central challenge in health services provision and research. This disparity is usually referred to as the theory–practice gap and contributes to concerns that scientific evidence fails to make substantial impacts on the processes of service delivery. In this article, we present an argument for the inclusion of ethnographic methods in health services research and show that this approach enables researchers to address this divergence by working within it. We trace how ethnography, through generative processes of oscillation, can take us beyond lamenting the gap and capture the relational dynamics of people working together in complex systemic arrangements. By moving from example to methodological reflection, to principle of research, we demonstrate how the oscillation of ethnographic research between theory and practice can productively contribute to the field of health service research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Throughout the last 20 years, the human rights perspective has increasingly developed into a paradigm against which to appraise and evaluate mental health care. This article investigates to what extent the Finnish open dialogue (OD) approach both aligns with human rights and may be qualified to strengthen compliance with human rights perspectives in global mental health care. Being a conceptual paper, the structural and therapeutic principles of OD are theoretically discussed against the background of human rights, as framed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the UN Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities, and the two recent annual reports of the Human Rights Council. It is shown that OD aligns well with discourses on human rights, being a largely non-institutional and non-medicalizing approach that both depends on and fosters local and context-bound forms of knowledge and practice. Its fundamental network perspective facilitates a contextual and relational understanding of mental well-being, as postulated by contemporary human rights approaches. OD opens the space for anyone to speak (out), for mutual respect and equality, for autonomy, and to address power differentials, making it well suited to preventing coercion and other forms of human rights violation. It is concluded that OD can be understood as a human rights-aligned approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This ethnographically informed implementation analysis of Parachute NYC between 2012 and 2015 documents the obstacles that can impede disruptive innovations in public mental health. Parachute combined family-based dialogic practice with peer-staffed crisis respite centers and mixed teams of clinicians and peers in an ambitious effort to revamp responses to psychiatric crises. This Open Forum reviews the demands posed by formidable contextual constraints, extended trainings in novel therapeutic techniques, and the effort to ensure sustainability in a managed care environment. It cautions that requiring innovations to produce evidence under the structural constraints that Parachute endured hobbles the effort and thwarts its success. The dialogic embrace of ordinary people and the use of peer labor as active treatment agents promote a slower and more participatory approach to psychiatric crises that offers extraordinary promise. However, a better prepared and more receptive context is needed for a fair trial of the comparative effectiveness of this approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As applied anthropologists used to working at arm's length from public psychiatry, we step out of the daily grind to take stock of the challenges of taking on ethnography entrained–harnessed to the implementation of a new program. These include the loss of critical distance, the struggles to negotiate locally viable forms of authority and relevance, the necessity of sustaining a Janus-faced relation with principal players, the urgency of seeing time-sensitive information converted into corrective feedback, and the undeniable attraction of being part of “committed work” with game-changing potential. In so doing, we rework the terms of witnessing and revive an old alternative: that documentary dirty work be reclaimed as a variant of public anthropology, one that transforms the work of application from mere afterthought to integral part of the original inquiry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]