...
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Psychiatry >How do care providers evaluate collaboration? - qualitative process evaluation of a cluster-randomized controlled trial of collaborative and stepped care for patients with mental disorders
【24h】

How do care providers evaluate collaboration? - qualitative process evaluation of a cluster-randomized controlled trial of collaborative and stepped care for patients with mental disorders

机译:护理提供者如何评估合作? - 对精神障碍患者的群体随机对照试验的定性过程评估

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Collaborative and stepped care (CSC) models are recommended for mental disorders. Their successful implementation depends on effective collaboration between involved care providers from primary and specialist care. To gain insights into the collaboration experiences of care providers in CSC against the backdrop of usual mental health care, a qualitative process evaluation was realized as part of a cluster-randomized controlled trial (COMET) of a collaborative and stepped care model in Hamburg (Germany). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with N?=?24 care providers from primary and specialist care (outpatient psychotherapists and psychiatrists, inpatient/ day clinic mental health providers) within and outside of COMET at the trial’s beginning and 12?months later. Interviews were analyzed applying a qualitative structuring content analysis approach, combining deductive and inductive category development. Usual mental health care was considered deficient in resources, with collaboration being scarce and mainly taking place in small informal networks. Within the COMET trial, quicker referral paths were welcomed, as were quarterly COMET network meetings which provided room for exchange and fostered mutual understanding. Yet, also in COMET, collaboration remained difficult due to communication problems, the unfavorable regional distribution of the COMET care providers and interprofessional discrepancies regarding each profession’s role, competencies and mutual esteem. Ideas for improvement included more localized networks, the inclusion of further professions and the overall amelioration of mental health care regarding resources and remuneration, especially for collaborative activities. The process evaluation of the COMET trial revealed the benefits of creating room for interprofessional encounter to foster collaborative care. Despite the benefits of faster patient referrals, the COMET network did not fulfill all care providers’ prior expectations. A focus should be set on interprofessional competencies, mutual perception and role clarification, as these have been revealed as significant barriers to collaboration within CSC models such as COMET. The COMET trial (Collaborative and Stepped Care in Mental Health by Overcoming Treatment Sector Barriers) has been registered on July 24, 2017 under the trial registration number NCT03226743 .
机译:建议为精神障碍进行协作和级数护理(CSC)模型。他们的成功实施取决于来自小学和专业护理的涉及护理提供者之间的有效合作。要深入了解CSC中护理提供者的协作经验,以防止普通心理保健的背景,定性流程评估被实现为汉堡(德国)在汉堡协作和步进护理模型的集群随机对照试验(COMET)的一部分(德国) )。在审判开始和12个月内,在彗星内部和外面的小学和专业护理(门诊心理治疗师和精神科医生,住院/日诊所)和外部)进行了半结构化访谈。分析了采访,应用了一个定性的结构分析方法,结合了演绎和归纳类开发。通常的心理保健被认为是资源缺乏,合作稀缺,主要发生在小型非正式网络中。在彗星审判中,欢迎更快的转诊路径,正如季度彗星网络会议,为交易所提供了汇率,促进了相互了解。然而,在彗星中,由于沟通问题,彗星护理提供者的不利区域分布和对每个专业的角色,能力和相互尊重的不利区域分布,合作仍然困难。改善的想法包括更多本地化网络,包括进一步的职业以及对资源和薪酬的整体改善精神卫生保健,特别是对于合作活动。彗星试验的过程评估揭示了创造竞争遭遇的房间的益处,以促进协作护理。尽管患者推荐更快的好处,但彗星网络没有满足所有护理提供者的先行期望。应归功于思想竞争力,相互认识和角色澄清,因为这些人被揭示为COMET等CSC模型中的合作的重要障碍。 2017年7月24日在审判登记号码NCT03226743下注册了彗星试验(通过克服治疗部门壁垒的精神健康的合作和步进护理)。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号