An Ethnography of Open Dialogue in the UK
Research type
Research Study
Full title
An Ethnography of Open Dialogue in the UK
IRAS ID
225229
Contact name
Fiona Wright
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
University of Cambridge
Duration of Study in the UK
0 years, 11 months, 31 days
Research summary
Open Dialogue is a form of therapy for people experiencing mental health problems that works with service users, their families and extended social networks. It was developed around principles of dialogism, meaning it attempts to bring out the multiple voices of the different individuals involved in mental health problems and care, and aims to provide a non-hierarchical, person-centred approach. Open Dialogue is offered through ‘network meetings’, meetings in which mental health practitioners, service users and members of their social network (e.g. family members, friends, carers) all gather to discuss the difficulties being experienced and possible further treatment options in a non-hierarchical and non-prescriptive manner. Initial studies of the use of Open Dialogue in Scandinavia have indicated highly successful results in the treatment of severe mental health problems, and as such interest in the therapy has increased elsewhere globally including in the UK. Mental health practitioners (psychiatrists, psychologists, nurses, peer support workers, and social workers) started training in Open Dialogue in the UK in 2014 and in 2017 a Randomised Controlled Trial of the therapy will begin in several trusts.
This research will use ethnographic research methods over the course of twelve months to explore how Open Dialogue is being put into practice in one NHS trust and how practitioners, service users, and members of their social networks engage with the therapy. In doing so, this research will fill in major gaps in knowledge surrounding the clinical practice of Open Dialogue and its effects on practitioners and service users.
REC name
London - Brent Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
17/LO/1244
Date of REC Opinion
12 Sep 2017
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion