'There's more to a person than what's in front of you': Nursing students' experiences of consumer taught mental health education

Holistic and person‐centred nursing care is commonly regarded as fundamental to nursing practice. These approaches are complementary to recovery which is rapidly becoming the preferred mode of practice within mental health. The willingness and ability of nurses to adopt recovery‐oriented practice is essential to services realizing recovery goals. Involving consumers (referred herein as Experts by Experience) in mental health nursing education has demonstrated positive impact on the skills and attitudes of nursing students. A qualitative exploratory research project was undertaken to examine the perspectives of undergraduate nursing students to Expert by Experience‐led teaching as part of a co‐produced learning module developed through an international study. Focus groups were held with students at each site. Data were analysed thematically. Understanding the person behind the diagnosis was a major theme, including subthemes: person‐centred care/seeing the whole person; getting to know the person, understanding, listening; and challenging the medical model, embracing recovery. Participants described recognizing consumers as far more than their psychiatric diagnoses, and the importance of person‐centred care and recovery‐oriented practice. Understanding the individuality of consumers, their needs and goals, is crucial in mental health and all areas of nursing practice. These findings suggest that recovery, taught by Experts by Experience, is effective and impactful on students’ approach to practice. Further research addressing the impact of Experts by Experience is crucial to enhance our understanding of ways to facilitate the development of recovery‐oriented practice in mental health and holistic and person‐centred practice in all areas of health care

Experts by experience in mental health nursing education: What have we learned from the COMMUNE project?

The COMMUNE (co-produced mental health nursing education) was an international project established to embed EBE perspectives in mental health nursing education by developing and delivering a specific mental health nursing module. The underlying intention of this project was to go well beyond ad hoc implementation and tokenistic approaches to EBE involvement. Standards for co-production of Education (Mental Health Nursing) (SCo-PE [MHN]) was developed to provide guidance to the increasing number of academics seeking genuine and meaningful involvement of Experts by Experience in the education of health professionals. These standards were recently published in the Journal of Mental Health and Psychiatric Nursing (Horgan et al., 2020): https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jpm.12605 and prompted this Editorial to discuss the COMMUNE project more fully, including the lessons learned

Expert by Experience involvement in Mental Health Nursing Education: The co-production of standards between Experts by Experience and Academics in Mental Health Nursing

Introduction: Involving people with lived experience of mental distress in mental health nursing education has gained considerable traction yet broader implementation remains ad-hoc and tokenistic. Effective involvement requires curricula be informed by lived experience of service use. Aim: To develop standards to underpin expert by experience involvement in mental health nursing education based on lived experience of service use. Methods: Phase one used qualitative descriptive methods, involving focus groups with service users (n=50) from six countries to explore perceptions of service user involvement in mental health nursing education. Phase two utilised these findings through consensus building to co-produce standards to support Experts by Experience involvement in mental health nursing education. Results: Three themes emerged in Phase one: enablers and barriers, practical and informational support, and emotional and appraisal support. These themes underpinned development of the standards, which reflect nine processes: induction and orientation, external supervision, supportive teamwork, preparation for teaching and assessing, 'intervision', mutual mentorship, pre and post debriefing, role clarity and equitable payment. Conclusions: These standards form the framework entitled; Standards for Co-production of Education (Mental Health Nursing) (SCo-PE [MHN]). Implications for Practice The standards aim to support implementation of Expert by Experience roles in mental health nursing education

Practice Guidelines for Co-Production of Mental Health Nursing Education

COMMUNE (Co-production of Mental Health Nursing Education) is an Erasmus+ Strategic Partnership Project based on the collaboration of experts by experience (EBE) and mental health nursing academics from six European universities and the University of Canberra in Australia. Its purpose was to advance the involvement of those who have experiences of mental health service use (EBE) in mental health nursing education. The project combined experiential and academic knowledge, with the aim of co-producing a module on ‘mental health recovery’ for undergraduate nursing students; a module that was taught to the students by EBE. Principles of co-production where followed as much as possible, involving EBE in all stages of the process, from grant application to dissemination. The project tried to move beyond typical service user involvement and towards co-creation of knowledge, where power differentials are acknowledged and equity issues addressed. Barriers to meeting these goals were experienced and will be discussed in this Guidelines. We hope that these Practice Guidelines will be useful for those who intend to co-produce learning programs or modules in mental health nursing and inspire others to follow similar paths and learn from our experiences, positive or otherwise. These Guidelines provide an overview of our experiences, learnings, limitations and barriers.The Commune team decided on the term ‘Expert by Experience’ (EBE) to describe the members of the team and other collaborators who has lived experience of mental distress. Other more commonly used terms are ‘service user’, ‘consumer’ and ‘people with mental illness.’ As not all experts by experience are mental health care users, and what constitutes an illness is highly debated, the team decided on a term that more correctly describes and value lived experience.Erasmus

Obesity in adults: a 2022 adapted clinical practice guideline for Ireland

This Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) for the management of obesity in adults in Ireland, adapted from the Canadian CPG, defines obesity as a complex chronic disease characterised by excess or dysfunctional adiposity that impairs health. The guideline reflects substantial advances in the understanding of the determinants, pathophysiology, assessment, and treatment of obesity. It shifts the focus of obesity management toward improving patient-centred health outcomes, functional outcomes, and social and economic participation, rather than weight loss alone. It gives recommendations for care that are underpinned by evidence-based principles of chronic disease management; validate patients' lived experiences; move beyond simplistic approaches of "eat less, move more" and address the root drivers of obesity. People living with obesity face substantial bias and stigma, which contribute to increased morbidity and mortality independent of body weight. Education is needed for all healthcare professionals in Ireland to address the gap in skills, increase knowledge of evidence-based practice, and eliminate bias and stigma in healthcare settings. We call for people living with obesity in Ireland to have access to evidence-informed care, including medical, medical nutrition therapy, physical activity and physical rehabilitation interventions, psychological interventions, pharmacotherapy, and bariatric surgery. This can be best achieved by resourcing and fully implementing the Model of Care for the Management of Adult Overweight and Obesity. To address health inequalities, we also call for the inclusion of obesity in the Structured Chronic Disease Management Programme and for pharmacotherapy reimbursement, to ensure equal access to treatment based on health-need rather than ability to pay

Definition of intertwin birth weight discordance

OBJECTIVE: To establish the level of birth weight discordance at which perinatal morbidity increases in monochorionic and dichorionic twin pregnancy. METHODS: This prospective multicenter cohort study included 1,028 unselected twin pairs recruited over a 2-year period. Participants underwent two weekly ultra-sonographic surveillance from 24 weeks of gestation with surveillance of monochorionic twins two-weekly from 16 weeks. Analysis using Cox proportional hazards compared a composite measure of perinatal morbidity (including any of the following: mortality, respiratory distress syndrome, hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy, periventricular leukomalacia, necrotizing enterocolitis, or sepsis) at different degrees of birth weight discordance with adjustment for chorionicity, gestational age, twin-twin transfusion syndrome, birth order, gender, and growth restriction. RESULTS: Perinatal outcome data were recorded for 977 patients (100%) who continued the study with both fetuses alive beyond 24 weeks, including 14 cases of twin-twin transfusion syndrome. Adjusting for gestation at delivery, twin order, gender, and growth restriction, perinatal mortality, individual morbidity, and composite perinatal morbidity were all seen to increase with birth weight discordance exceeding 18% for dichorionic pairs (hazard ratio 2.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.6-2.9, P<.001) and 18% for monochorionic twins without twin-twin transfusion syndrome (hazard ratio 2.6, 95% CI 1.6-4.3, P<.001). A minimum twofold increase in risk of perinatal morbidity persisted even when both twin birth weights were appropriate for gestational age. CONCLUSION: The threshold for birth weight discordance established by this prospective study is 18% both for dichorionic twin pairs and for monochorionic twins without twin-twin transfusion syndrome. This threshold is considerably lower than that defined by many retrospective series as pathologic. We suggest that an anticipated difference of 18% in birth weight should prompt more intensive fetal monitoring. (Obstet Gynecol 2011;118:94-103) DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31821fd20

Optimum timing for planned delivery of uncomplicated monochorionic and dichorionic twin pregnancies

OBJECTIVE: To determine the optimum timing for planned delivery of uncomplicated monochorionic and dichorionic twin pregnancies. METHODS: Unselected twin pregnancies were recruited for this prospective cohort study (N=1,028), which was conducted in eight tertiary referral perinatal centers in Ireland. Perinatal mortality and a composite measure of perinatal morbidity (respiratory distress, necrotizing enterocolitis, hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy, periventricular leukomalacia, or sepsis) were compared between uncomplicated twins that underwent planned preterm delivery compared with monochorionic twins that continued in utero beyond 34 weeks of gestation, and dichorionic twins who continued beyond 36 weeks. RESULTS: Perinatal outcome data were recorded for 100% of the 1,001 twin pairs that completed the study (n=200 monochorionic and n=801 dichorionic). Overall perinatal mortality was 30 per 1,000 in monochorionic twins and 3.8 per 1,000 among dichorionic twins. The prospective risk of in utero death was 1.5% after 34 weeks of gestation for uncomplicated monochorionic pregnancies, with no deaths among dichorionic twins after 33 weeks. The risk of a composite measure of perinatal morbidity for uncomplicated monochorionic twins fell from 41% (13/32 neonates, 3/6 among elective deliveries) at 34 weeks to 5% (4/84) at 37 weeks (P<.001). Among dichorionic twins, the risk of morbidity fell from 4% (2/52) among elective deliveries at 36 weeks to 1% (5/344) in pregnancies continuing to 38 weeks (P=.231). CONCLUSION: Applying a strategy of close fetal surveillance, perinatal morbidity can be minimized by allowing uncomplicated monochorionic pregnancies continue to 37 weeks of gestation and dichorionic twins to 38 weeks. Among monochorionic twins, this approach must be balanced against a 1.5% risk of late in utero death. (Obstet Gynecol 2012;119:50-9) DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31823d7b0