Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Nov 4;20(1):523.
doi: 10.1186/s12888-020-02871-y.

Striving for a more person-centered psychosis care: results of a hospital-based multi-professional educational intervention

Affiliations

Striving for a more person-centered psychosis care: results of a hospital-based multi-professional educational intervention

Katarina Allerby et al. BMC Psychiatry. .

Abstract

Background: Reluctance on the part of mental health professionals constitutes an important barrier to patient participation in care. In order to stimulate person-centeredness in the inpatient care of persons with psychotic illness, we developed and tested an educational intervention for hospital staff (including psychiatrists) at all four wards at the Psychosis Clinic, Sahlgrenska University Hospital in Gothenburg, Sweden. The intervention was co-created by professionals, patients, and researchers using a participatory approach. In addition to lectures and workshops, staff created and implemented small projects to increase person-centeredness on their own wards. A primary focus was to establish a partnership between patient and staff by capturing and utilizing the patient's narrative to support active engagement in the care process. This included the development of a person-centered care plan. We hypothesized that the intervention would be associated with increased patient empowerment (primary outcome) and satisfaction with care (secondary outcome).

Methods: A before and after design was used to test group differences in patient empowerment (Empowerment Scale) and consumer satisfaction (UKU-ConSat Rating Scale). All patients receiving inpatient psychosis care during measuring periods were eligible if meeting inclusion criteria of schizophrenia spectrum disorder, age > 18, and ability to comprehend study information. Severe cognitive deficit and inadequate Swedish language skills were exclusion criteria. Data on possible confounding variables including overall health (EQ-5D), symptom burden (PANSS), and functional ability (GAF) were collected alongside outcome measures.

Results: ANCOVAs with overall health as a confounding variable showed no group differences regarding empowerment before (n = 50) versus after (n = 49) intervention, sample mean = 2.87/2.99, p = .142, eta2 = .02, CI = -.27-.04. Consumer satisfaction (n = 50/50) was higher in the post-implementation group (4.46 versus 11.71, p = .041 eta2 = .04, CI = -14.17- -.31).

Conclusion: The hypothesis regarding the primary outcome, empowerment, was not supported. An increase in the secondary outcome, satisfaction, was observed, although the effect size was small, and results should be interpreted with caution. Findings from this staff educational intervention can inform the development of future studies aimed at improvement of inpatient care for persons with severe mental illness.

Trial registration: The trial was retrospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov June 9, 2017, identifier: NCT03182283.

Keywords: Consumer satisfaction; Empowerment; Patient outcomes; Person-centered care; Person-centered psychosis care; Psychosis; Schizophrenia.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
The educational and experimental learning phase process. Figure 1 was originally published in our study protocol, Goulding et al. (2018), BMC Psychiatry by Springer Nature and is used here under the Creative Common License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

References

    1. Hamann J, Langer B, Winkler V, Busch R, Cohen R, Leucht S, et al. Shared decision making for in-patients with schizophrenia. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2006;114(4):265–273. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0447.2006.00798.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hamann J, Cohen R, Leucht S, Busch R, Kissling W. Do patients with schizophrenia wish to be involved in decisions about their medical treatment? Am J Psychiatry. 2005;162(12):2382–2384. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.162.12.2382. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kinter E, Schmeding A, Rudolph I, dos Reis S, Bridges J. Identifying patient-relevant endpoints among individuals with schizophrenia: an application of patient-centered health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25(1):35–41. doi: 10.1017/S0266462309090059. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lasalvia A, Boggian I, Bonetto C, Saggioro V, Piccione G, Zanoni C, et al. Multiple perspectives on mental health outcome: needs for care and service satisfaction assessed by staff, patients and family members. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2012;47(7):1035–1045. doi: 10.1007/s00127-011-0418-0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Fischer E, Shumway M, Owen R. Priorities of consumers, providers, and family members in the treatment of schizophrenia. Psychiatr Serv. 2002;53(6):724–729. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.53.6.724. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data

Grants and funding