So if we like the idea of peer workers, why aren’t we seeing more?

Recovery approaches are widely and increasingly promoted internationally in mental health policy and services. Peer support working is a new professional role in mental health services and provides a tangible example of recovery principles being applied within the context of these services. As a consequence, there is a great deal of interest in emerging evidence around this role, and whether/how evidence might support increased and more effective involvement of peer workers. Our editorial presents findings from research in Scotland and on the basis of these, poses some “big questions” concerning what needs to happen to accelerate progress in not only the employment of peer workers but also in mental health services’ recovery approaches more generally

Internalised stigma in mental health:an investigation of the role of attachment style

This thesis examines the role of adult attachment style on the internalisation of stigma amongst adults affected by mental health problems in the United Kingdom. A systematic review, completed for this thesis, on the role of social and relational factors in internalised stigma found strongest evidence for a negative association between social support and internalised stigma. Just one eligible study considered the role of attachment style. In the empirical study, a transdiagnostic sample with experience of recent secondary mental health service use (n = 122) completed an online cross-sectional survey with measures of internalised and perceived public stigma, adult attachment style, self-esteem, mood and functioning. Correlation analysis tested whether internalised stigma and perceived public stigma were significantly positively correlated (hypothesis one). Hierarchical multiple regression tested whether anxious and avoidant attachment styles were positively associated with a significant amount of variance in internalised stigma when controlling for other variables (hypotheses two and three). Regression-based moderation analysis tested whether the relationship between perceived public stigma and internalised stigma was moderated by anxious and avoidant attachment styles (hypotheses four and five). Results indicated that internalised stigma, perceived public stigma and insecure attachment were common in this sample. Internalised stigma was positively associated with perceived public stigma but neither anxious or avoidant attachment were associated with a significant amount of variance in internalised stigma when controlling for other variables. Similarly, no moderating effect on the relationship between perceived public stigma and internalised stigma was found for insecure attachment. Limitations, which may have contributed towards the failure to find some predicted effects, are discussed. Implications for policy and practice are also discussed and recommendations are made for future research. It is concluded that despite these mixed results further research on the role of attachment style in internalised stigma is warranted

Internalised stigma in mental health:an investigation of the role of attachment style

Internalised stigma is associated with a range of negative outcomes, yet little is known about what determines the internalisation of stigma. In this study we examined the potential role of adult attachment style in the internalisation process in a transdiagnostic sample of adults with experience of recent mental health service use (n = 122), using an online survey. Associations between internalised stigma and perceived public stigma were tested. We also examined whether anxious and avoidant (insecure) attachment styles were positively associated with a significant amount of variance in internalised stigma when controlling for other variables, and whether the relationship between perceived public stigma and internalised stigma was moderated by anxious and avoidant attachment. We found that internalised stigma, perceived public stigma and insecure attachment were commonly reported and that internalised stigma was positively associated with perceived public stigma. However, neither anxious or avoidant attachment were associated with a significant amount of variance in internalised stigma and we found no moderating effect on the relationship between perceived public stigma and internalised stigma for insecure attachment. Despite mixed results, the strength of association between anxious attachment and internalised stigma suggests further research, which addresses some limitations of the current study, is warranted

Developing a hypothetical implementation framework of expectations for monitoring early signs of psychosis relapse using a mobile app: qualitative study

Background: Relapse is a common experience for people diagnosed with psychosis, which is associated with increased service costs and profound personal and familial distress. EMPOWER (Early signs Monitoring to Prevent relapse in psychosis and prOmote Well-being, Engagement, and Recovery) is a peer worker–supported digital intervention that aims to enable service users to self-monitor their mental health with the aim of encouraging self-management and the shared use of personal data to promote relapse prevention. Digital interventions have not been widely used in relapse prevention and, therefore, little is currently known about their likely implementation—both within trials and beyond. Objective: Seeking the perspectives of all relevant stakeholder groups is recommended in developing theories about implementation because this can reveal important group differences in understandings and assumptions about whether and for whom the intervention is expected to work. However, the majority of intervention implementation research has been retrospective. This study aimed to discover and theoretically frame implementation expectations in advance of testing and synthesize these data into a framework. Methods: To develop a hypothetical implementation framework, 149 mental health professionals, carers, and people diagnosed with psychosis participated in 25 focus groups in both Australia and the United Kingdom. An interview schedule informed by the normalization process theory was used to explore stakeholders’ expectations about the implementation of the EMPOWER intervention. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis and then theoretically framed using the Medical Research Council guidelines for understanding the implementation of complex interventions. Results: All groups expected that EMPOWER could be successfully implemented if the intervention generated data that were meaningful to mental health staff, carers, and service users within their unique roles. However, there were key differences between staff, carers, and service users about what facilitators and barriers that stakeholders believe exist for intervention implementation in both the cluster randomized controlled trial stage and beyond. For example, service user expectations mostly clustered around subjective user experiences, whereas staff and carers spoke more about the impact upon staff interactions with service users. Conclusions: A hypothetical implementation framework synthesized from stakeholder implementation expectations provides an opportunity to compare actual implementation data gathered during an ongoing clinical trial, giving valuable insights into the accuracy of these stakeholders’ previous expectations. This is among the first studies to assess and record implementation expectations for a newly developed digital intervention for psychosis in advance of testing in a clinical trial

Evaluating the feasibility of complex interventions in mental health services: standardised measure and reporting guidelines

Aims: To develop a) an empirically-based standardised measure of the feasibility of complex interventions for use within mental health services and b) reporting guidelines to facilitate feasibility assessment. Method: A focussed narrative review of studies assessing implementation blocks and enablers was conducted with thematic analysis and vote counting used to determine candidate items for the measure. Twenty purposively sampled studies (15 trial reports, 5 protocols) were included in the psychometric evaluation, spanning different interventions types. Cohen’s Kappa was calculated for inter-rater reliability and test-retest reliability. Results: 95 influences on implementation were identified from 299 reviewed references. The final measure - Structured Assessment of Feasibility (SAFE) - comprises 16 items rated on a Likert scale. SAFE demonstrated excellent inter-rater (kappa 0.84, 95% CI 0.79 - 0.89) and test re-test reliability (kappa 0.89, 95% CI 0.85 - 0.93). Cost information and training time were the two influences least likely to be reported in intervention papers. SAFE Reporting Guidelines include 16 items organised into 3 categories (Intervention, Resource consequences, Evaluation). Conclusion: SAFE is a novel approach to evaluating interventions, and supplements efficacy and health economic evidence. SAFE Reporting Guidelines will allow feasibility of an intervention to be systematically assessed

Understanding implementation of a digital self-monitoring intervention for relapse prevention in psychosis: protocol for a mixed methods process evaluation

Background: Relapse is common in people who experience psychosis and is associated with many negative consequences, both societal and personal. People who relapse often exhibit changes (early warning signs [EWS]) in the period before relapse. Successful identification of EWS offers an opportunity for relapse prevention. However, several known barriers impede the use of EWS monitoring approaches. Early signs Monitoring to Prevent relapse in psychosis and prOmote Well-being, Engagement, and Recovery (EMPOWER) is a complex digital intervention that uses a mobile app to enhance the detection and management of self-reported changes in well-being. This is currently being tested in a pilot cluster randomized controlled trial. As digital interventions have not been widely used in relapse prevention, little is known about their implementation. Process evaluation studies run in parallel to clinical trials can provide valuable data on intervention feasibility. Objective: This study aims to transparently describe the protocol for the process evaluation element of the EMPOWER trial. We will focus on the development of a process evaluation framework sensitive to the worldview of service users, mental health staff, and carers; the aims of the process evaluation itself; the proposed studies to address these aims; and a plan for integration of results from separate process evaluation studies into one overall report. Methods: The overall process evaluation will utilize mixed methods across 6 substudies. Among them, 4 will use qualitative methodologies, 1 will use a mixed methods approach, and 1 will use quantitative methodologies. Results: The results of all studies will be triangulated into an overall analysis and interpretation of key implementation lessons. EMPOWER was funded in 2016, recruitment finished in January 2018. Data analysis is currently under way and the first results are expected to be submitted for publication in December 2019. Conclusions: The findings from this study will help identify implementation facilitators and barriers to EMPOWER. These insights will inform both upscaling decisions and optimization of a definitive trial

Perspectives of patients, carers and mental health staff on early warning signs of relapse in psychosis: a qualitative investigation.

BACKGROUND: Relapse prevention strategies based on monitoring of early warning signs (EWS) are advocated for the management of psychosis. However, there has been a lack of research exploring how staff, carers and patients make sense of the utility of EWS, or how these are implemented in context. AIMS: To develop a multiperspective theory of how EWS are understood and used, which is grounded in the experiences of mental health staff, carers and patients. METHOD: Twenty-five focus groups were held across Glasgow and Melbourne (EMPOWER Trial, ISRCTN: 99559262). Participants comprised 88 mental health staff, 21 patients and 40 carers from UK and Australia (total n = 149). Data were analysed using constructivist grounded theory. RESULTS: All participants appeared to recognise EWS and acknowledged the importance of responding to EWS to support relapse prevention. However, recognition of and acting on EWS were constructed in a context of uncertainty, which appeared linked to risk appraisals that were dependent on distinct stakeholder roles and experiences. Within current relapse management, a process of weighted decision-making (where one factor was seen as more important than others) described how stakeholders weighed up the risks and consequences of relapse alongside the risks and consequences of intervention and help-seeking. CONCLUSIONS: Mental health staff, carers and patients speak about using EWS within a weighted decision-making process, which is acted out in the context of relationships that exist in current relapse management, rather than an objective response to specific signs and symptoms

Not the story you want? Assessing the fit of a conceptual framework characterising mental health recovery narratives

Narratives of recovery have been central to the development of the recovery approach in mental health. However, there has been a lack of clarity around definitions. A recent conceptual framework characterised recovery narratives based on a systematic review and narrative synthesis of existing literature, but was based on a limited sample. The aims of this study were to assess the relevance of the framework to the narratives of more diverse populations, and to develop a refined typology intended to inform narrative-based research, practice and intervention development. Method: 77 narrative interviews were conducted with respondents from four under-researched mental health sub-populations across England. Deductive and inductive analysis was used to assess the relevance of the dimensions and types of the preliminary typology to the interview narratives. Results: Five or more dimensions were identifiable within 97% of narratives. The preliminary typology was refined to include new definitions and types. The typology was found not to be relevant to two narratives, whose narrators expressed a preference for non-verbal communication. These are presented as case studies to define the limits of the typology. Conclusion: The refined typology, based on the largest study to date of recovery narratives, provides a defensible theoretical base for clinical and research use with a range of clinical populations. Implications for practice include ensuring a heterogeneous selection of narratives as resources to support recovery, and developing new approaches to supporting non-verbal narrative construction

Perspectives of trial staff on the barriers to recruitment in a digital intervention for psychosis and how to work around them: qualitative study within a trial

Background: Recruitment processes for clinical trials of digital interventions for psychosis are seldom described in detail in the literature. Although trial staff have expertise in describing barriers to and facilitators of recruitment, a specific focus on understanding recruitment from the point of view of trial staff is rare, and because trial staff are responsible for meeting recruitment targets, a lack of research on their point of view is a key limitation. Objective: The primary aim of this study was to understand recruitment from the point of view of trial staff and discover what they consider important. Methods: We applied pluralistic ethnographic methods, including analysis of trial documents, observation, and focus groups, and explored the recruitment processes of the EMPOWER (Early Signs Monitoring to Prevent Relapse in Psychosis and Promote Well-being, Engagement, and Recovery) feasibility trial, which is a digital app–based intervention for people diagnosed with schizophrenia. Results: Recruitment barriers were categorized into 2 main themes: service characteristics (lack of time available for mental health staff to support recruitment, staff turnover, patient turnover [within Australia only], management styles of community mental health teams, and physical environment) and clinician expectations (filtering effects and resistance to research participation). Trial staff negotiated these barriers through strategies such as emotional labor (trial staff managing feelings and expressions to successfully recruit participants) and trying to build relationships with clinical staff working within community mental health teams. Conclusions: Researchers in clinical trials for digital psychosis interventions face numerous recruitment barriers and do their best to work flexibly and to negotiate these barriers and meet recruitment targets. The recruitment process appeared to be enhanced by trial staff supporting each other throughout the recruitment stage of the trial