An exploration of the factors influencing career choice in mental health

Aims and objectives: To identify the factors that are associated with considering a career in mental health. Background: The mental health specialty is facing a recruitment crisis in the United Kingdom but there is limited evidence about which factors encourage and discourage people from considering a career in mental health. Design: Quantitative, observational, online survey using a multiple ordinal logistic regression model to identify if there were any significant predictors of the extent to which participants would consider a career in mental health. The design and write up of the study were guided by the STROBE checklist. Method: We gathered the views of 231 participants (female = 188, 81.7%) aged between 16–65 (mean = 22.7, SD = 8.9), using an online survey, the majority of whom were studying on, or graduates of, psychology/social studies degrees. Information was gathered about the extent to which a range of factors influenced consideration of a career in mental health. Results: The majority (71.2%) of participants reported that they would definitely or probably consider undertaking a career in mental health, and over half (51.4%) would consider a career as a mental health nurse. The ability to help others and receiving appropriate training required for the role were important career choice factors. Being female, having a mental health condition and greater knowledge of mental health were associated with a significantly greater likelihood of considering a career in mental health, while having had experience of working with people with mental health difficulties was significantly negatively associated. Conclusions: Students and graduates of psychology and social studies degrees appear to be a large, untapped recruitment pool for mental health services. Relevance to clinical practice: The results can inform more targeted recruitment strategies and development of suitable career pathways for those interested in a career in mental health

Cross-national mixed methods comparative case study of recovery-focused mental health care planning and coordination in acute inpatient mental health settings (COCAPP-A)

Background: Serious concerns have been identified in relation to care planning, patient involvement and consent to treatment in mental health wards, including for those patients detained under the Mental Health Act. Further evidence is needed to develop care planning interventions that embed dignity, recovery and participation for all people using inpatient mental health care. Design: We propose to undertake a cross-national comparative study of recovery-focused mental health care planning in inpatient settings. This two-phase exploratory mixed methods study will produce theory and empirical evidence to complement that developed in our current study of community mental health services to inform a future whole systems intervention study. The study is guided by a theoretical framework emphasising the connections between different 'levels' of organisation (macro/meso/micro). In phase 1 we study the macro-level through the comparative analysis of English and Welsh policy contexts. In phase 2 concurrent quantitative and qualitative data will be collected at 6 NHS Trust/Health Board case study sites (meso-level) and within each site, a single micro-level mental health ward will be selected to provide in-depth qualitative data related to care planning processes. Phase 1: We will extend our current meta-narrative mapping review (Wong et al 2013) of English and Welsh policies and the international literature on personalised recovery-oriented care planning and coordination in community settings to include inpatient settings. We will provide a review of evidence that is useful, rigorous and relevant for service providers and decision-makers and to inform Phase 2. Phase 2: We are employing a concurrent transformative mixed methods approach with embedded case studies (Creswell 2009: 215). We will conduct six in-depth meso-level case study investigations across contrasting NHS Trusts in England (n=4) and Local Health Boards in Wales (n=2), selected to reflect variety in geography and population and include a mix of rural, urban and inner city settings providing routine inpatient care. A large sample of service users (total n=300), inpatient staff (n=300) and informal carers (n=150) will be surveyed about perceptions of acute mental health care and care planning, recovery oriented practices, therapeutic relationships and empowerment using validated questionnaires. Documents and interviews with managers, consultant psychiatrists, ward staff and informal carers (n=60) will also be generated relating to local contexts, policies and practices. In each site we will also select a single inpatient ward and conduct a series of case studies embedded within each organisational case study, to explore care planning in detail. We will invite a sample of service users (total n=36) to participate in in-depth interviews about care planning and structured narrative reviews of their care plans; undertake a structured review of anonymised care plans for a further sample (n=60) of consecutively discharged patients; and conduct observation of care planning processes (n= 18). Framework method will be employed to integrate and compare textual and statistical summaries of qualitative and quantitative analyses within each case study site, informed by the theoretical framework focused on recovery and personalisation. Armed with our set of six within-case analyses we will then conduct a cross-case analysis to draw out key findings from across all sites

A mixed‐methods evaluation of a Recovery College in South East Essex for people with mental health difficulties

Recovery Colleges aim to assist people with mental health difficulties in the journey to recovery through education. They bring together professional and lived experience of mental health challenges in a non-stigmatising college environment and operate on college principles. All courses are designed to contribute towards wellbeing and recovery. Despite the ever-growing number of Recovery Colleges (both in the UK and internationally), the evaluative evidence is limited; comprising mostly non-peer-reviewed evaluations, audits and case studies. The present article comprises a mixed-methods evaluation of a newly established Recovery College in South East Essex, UK. The evaluation comprised questionnaires of mental wellbeing and social inclusion at baseline, and three and six month follow-up; in addition to three focus groups. There were significant improvements in both mental wellbeing and social inclusion from baseline to six month follow-up (25 participants completed the measure of wellbeing at both time points, and 19 completed the measure of social inclusion). This was supported by additional free-text questionnaire comments and focus group findings (17 participants participated across the focus groups), with reports of increased confidence, reduced anxiety, and increased social inclusion/reduced social isolation. Additionally, at six month follow-up the majority of respondents were planning on attending courses external to the Recovery College, volunteering, and/or gaining paid employment. Challenges and recommendations identified through the focus groups indicate the importance for standardisation of processes (which is particularly important when multiple organisations are involved in the running of a Recovery College), as well as consideration of longer-running courses. Funders should continue to invest in the Recovery College movement as the growing evidence-base is demonstrating how these colleges can help address the high prevalence of mental health difficulties, by promoting mental wellbeing and social inclusion