Comparing service user perspectives of an early intervention in psychosis service before and during COVID-19 lockdowns: a service evaluation.

Purpose: This service evaluation aims to understand the experiences of service users (SUs) who accessed an early intervention in psychosis (EIP) service during the Coronavirus pandemic using qualitative and quantitative methodologies and compare these to a previous pre-pandemic study conducted within the same service (Watkins et al., 2018). Design/methodology/approach: This paper collated experiences of individuals accessing an EIP service to inform service development. Questionnaires and individual interviews were conducted to provide quantitative and qualitative data. Descriptive statistics and T-test confidence intervals were created from the results and compared to findings of Watkins et al. (2018). Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using Braun and Clarke's (2006) thematic analysis. Findings: Data showed participants were largely satisfied with all areas of the service with "work or education", "living skills", and "addictions" scoring highest. Though participants reported no overall dissatisfaction, satisfaction levels dropped in "social activities" compared to the findings of Watkins et al. (2018), perhaps due to the national restrictions put in place to manage the spread of Coronavirus during this time. Interview analysis identified three themes of importance consistent with prior literature, highlighting the importance of relationships and validation during recovery. Research limitations/implications: This evaluation did not consider whether participants had accessed the service prior to the pandemic or only during, meaning that some participants could have a point of comparison with the service pre-pandemic, whereas others might not. Similarly, the participants were not the same as those of the Watkins et al.'s (2018) evaluation, meaning that direct comparisons of pre- and post-pandemic experiences were not possible. In addition, this evaluation collected data at only one time point early in the pandemic; therefore, it is unknown if client experiences of services differed as the pandemic and restrictions continued over time. Originality/value: The Covid-19 pandemic has been an unprecedented challenge for health services, and the effects of this are becoming widely reported. This evaluation of clinical services offers a valuable perspective of service user experience of receiving mental health services during a global health crisis further offering a comparison to pre-pandemic services and the experiences of those who used them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]