Search

Recovery Colleges are an innovative approach to promoting personal recovery for people experiencing mental illness. This study was to explore experiences of students, supporters, staff, educators and external stakeholders (i.e. partner organisations) of a pilot Recovery College in the Australian Capital Territory (ACTRC), and the impact of participation in the College for students and supporters. ACTRC students, supporters, staff and educators, and external stakeholders were invited to participate in a mixed-method evaluation via an online survey, interviews and/or focus groups. The survey included questions regarding experiences and recovery-orientation of the College environment, and for students and supporters only, satisfaction with the College. Qualitative data from interviews and focus groups was inductively coded, thematically analysed and triangulated with survey responses. The findings suggest that the ACTRC provides a safe space, promotes meaningful connections within and beyond the college, and offers steppingstones supporting recovery and growth. Participants spoke positively about cross institutional partnerships and collaboration with several organisations within the ACT. This evaluation reiterates the role of Recovery Colleges as an innovative approach to promoting personal recovery for people living with mental illness. Adequate resourcing and collaboration are essential in realising the value of co-production whilst ensuring sustainability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The National Suicide Prevention Trial was announced by the Australian Government in 2016 and aimed to prevent suicidal behaviour in 12 trial sites (representing a population of ~8 million). This study investigated the early population-level impact of the National Suicide Prevention Trial activity on rates of suicide and hospital admissions for self-harm in comparison to control areas. Methods: Relative and absolute differences in monthly rates of suicide and hospital admissions for self-harm were compared in the period after the National Suicide Prevention Trial implementation (July 2017–November 2020) to the period prior to implementation (January 2010–June 2017) in (1) 'National Suicide Prevention Trial areas' and (2) 'Control areas', using a difference-in-difference method in a series of negative binomial models. Analyses also investigated whether associations for suicide and self-harm rates differed by key socio-demographic factors, namely sex, age group, area socio-economic status and urban–rural residence. Results: There were no substantial differences between 'National Suicide Prevention Trial areas' and 'Control areas' in rates of suicide (2% relative decrease, relative risk = 0.98, 95% confidence interval = [0.91, 1.06]) or self-harm (1% relative decrease, relative risk = 0.99, 95% confidence interval = [0.96, 1.02]), adjusting for sex, age group and socio-economic status. Stronger relative decreases in self-harm only were evident for those aged 50–64 years, high socio-economic status areas, metropolitan and remote geographic areas. Conclusion: There was limited evidence that the National Suicide Prevention Trial resulted in reductions in suicide or hospital admissions for self-harm during the first 4 years of implementation. Continued monitoring of trends with timely data is imperative over the next 2–3 years to ascertain whether there are any subsequent impacts of National Suicide Prevention Trial activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Integrated care research often fails to adequately describe co-design methods. This article outlines the process, principles and tools to co-design an integrated health and social care Hub for families experiencing adversity. Research methods: The Child and Family Hub was co-designed in four stages: (1) partnership building and stakeholder engagement, (2) formative research, (3) persona development and (4) co-design workshops and consultations. Local families, community members and intersectoral practitioners were engaged at each stage. The co-design workshops employed a human-centred design process and were evaluated using the Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool (PEET). Results: 121 family participants and 80 practitioners were engaged in the Hub’s codesign. The PEET highlighted the co-design team’s satisfaction achieved by community members working alongside practitioners to generate mutual learning. Resourcing was a key challenge. Discussion: Human-centred design offered a systematic process and tools for integrating formative evidence with lived and professional experience in the Hub’s codesign. Applying community engagement principles meant that a diverse range of stakeholders were engaged across all stages of the project which built trust in and local ownership of the Hub model. Conclusion: Co-design research with families experiencing adversity should attend to language, engagement methods, team composition and resourcing decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. National systems-based suicide prevention approaches are increasingly being implemented. Community participation is fundamental to the successful implementation of these approaches, but can be challenging to undertake. We present findings from the evaluation of Australia's National Suicide Prevention Trial (the Trial). Methods. We completed consultations with 127 community members and 46 Primary Health Network (PHN) staff. Thematic analysis was undertaken to understand the process of community participation in the planning and implementation of the Trial. Results. Themes were identified regarding: a collaborative PHN; an engaged and passionate community; maintaining engagement; getting the right people involved; and getting stakeholders to work together. Continuous negotiation about Trial ownership, acceptability of the Trial model, and choice of activities was required. Community participation was somewhat challenging for PHNs, taking much longer than anticipated for a range of reasons. Conclusions. Future system-based approaches could benefit from the provision of community participation skills training and support to enable a more coordinated, and perhaps more easily achieved, approach to the involvement of community. Despite a long process of relationship building between stakeholders, this led to improved community cohesion and integration in local suicide prevention, ready for future collaborative work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]