What is the experience of peer-supported open dialogue service users?
Research type
Research Study
Full title
What is the experience of peer-supported open dialogue service users?
IRAS ID
172997
Contact name
Jack Closs
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
City University London
Duration of Study in the UK
1 years, 2 months, 31 days
Research summary
Study Background
The Finnish Open Dialogue approach believes that meetings of mental health professionals, people suffering from psychosis and their families should focus on facilitating dialogue that tolerates uncertainty and encourages a non-hierarchical discussion, in which a mutually meaningful and need adapted outcome is hoped for (Seikkula, 2002).Support from those who have experienced severe mental illness (SMI) (likely to have had psychiatric hospital admission/s or >6 months of community psychiatric care with >1 worker) themselves will be combined with Open Dialogue to form Peer-Supported Open-Dialogue (POD) for SMI. North East London Foundation NHS Trust (NELFT) is working with other NHS trusts to implement a randomized control trial of POD.
The Current POD Service Model Approach
NELFT service users who have consented to work with the POD approach will be people who are suffering from SMI, being cared for by Havering Community Recovery Team (CRT), or a relative of such a person.POD practitioners in this test phase will be mental health professionals who are being trained in POD; Peer support-workers will not be included as POD practitioners until the full POD service launches, this study will focus on test cases of a POD model that excludes this component.
All POD ‘network meetings’ will be based on Open Dialogue principles. Treatment as usual will continue but network meetings will be central to the care process/pathway.
An initial meeting with the person suffering from SMI, their family (if they are available) and POD practitioner/s, will be arranged at either the service users’ home or NELFT premises. The treatment plan will be reviewed in this meeting. The same POD practitioner/s will meet with the person experiencing SMI and their family (depending on their availability) for subsequent review sessions. These meetings will continue until the service users and POD practitioners agree that they are no longer necessary.
Study Rationale and Aims
This study’s primary aim is to explore how this POD service model approach is experienced by POD service-users.It wants to inform the POD trial about how acceptable and useful this service model is to its service users. This secondary aim however is only a hoped for consequence of what the study reveals about POD service users’ experience.
Since POD aims to help its service users towards a more helpful understanding of SMI through dialogue, their experience of POD as it is constructed in the family is the focus of this study.
REC name
London - Surrey Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
15/LO/0733
Date of REC Opinion
1 Jun 2015
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion