Involved, Inputting or Informing?: ‘Shared’ Decision Making in Adult Mental Healthcare

Bradley, Eleanor ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5877-2298 and Green, D. (2018) Involved, Inputting or Informing?: ‘Shared’ Decision Making in Adult Mental Healthcare. Health Expectations, 21 (1). pp. 192-200. ISSN 1369-6513 Online: 1369-7625

	Text (Accepted pre proof version) Health Expectations Paper Revision 3 April 2017.docx - Accepted Version Restricted to Repository staff only Download (57kB) | Request a copy
	Text Health Expectations Paper Revision 3 April 2017.pdf - Submitted Version Restricted to Repository staff only Download (198kB) | Request a copy
Preview	Text Bradley_et_al-2017-Health_Expectations.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (289kB) | Preview

Abstract

Background
A diagnosis of serious mental illness can impact on the whole family. Families informally provide significant amounts of care but are disproportionately at risk of carer burden when compared to those supporting people with other long-term conditions. Shared decision making (SDM) is an ethical model of health communication associated with positive health outcomes, however there has been little research to evaluate how routinely family are invited to participate in SDM, or what this looks like in practice.
Objective
This UK study aimed to better understand how the family caregivers of those diagnosed with SMI are currently involved in decision making, particularly decisions about treatment options including prescribed medication. Objectives were to:-
• Explore the extent to which family members wish to be involved in decisions about prescribed medication
• Determine how and when professionals engage family in these decisions
• Identify barriers and facilitators associated with the engagement of family in decisions about treatment.
Participants
Open-ended questions were sent to professionals and family members to elicit written responses. Qualitative responses were analysed thematically.
Results
Themes included the definition of involvement and ‘rules of engagement’. Staff members are gatekeepers for family involvement and the process is not democratic. Family and staff ascribe practical, rather than recovery-oriented roles to family, with preoccupation around notions of adherence.
Conclusions
Staff members need support, training and education to apply SDM. Time to exchange information is vital but practically difficult. Negotiated teams, comprising of staff, service users, family, peers as applicable, with ascribed roles and responsibilities could support SDM.

Actions (login required)

View Item