Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T05:49:16.119Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of a co-facilitated information and learning programme for service users: the EOLAS programme

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 August 2019

A. Higgins Open the ORCID record for A. Higgins [Opens in a new window] ,
C. Downes ,
M. Monahan ,
D. Hevey ,
F. Boyd ,
N. Cusack  and
P. Gibbons
A. Higgins*
Affiliation:
School of Nursing & Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
C. Downes
Affiliation:
School of Nursing & Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
M. Monahan
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
D. Hevey
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
F. Boyd
Affiliation:
Kildare Youth Services, Kildare, Ireland
N. Cusack
Affiliation:
Celbridge Adult Mental Health Services, Kildare, Ireland
P. Gibbons
Affiliation:
Celbridge Adult Mental Health Services, Kildare, Ireland
*
*Address for correspondence: A. Higgins, Professor Agnes Higgins, School of Nursing & Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. (Email: [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background:

The co-production and co-facilitation of recovery-focused education programmes is one way in which service users may be meaningfully involved as partners.

Objectives:

To evaluate the impact of a clinician and peer co-facilitated information programme on service users’ knowledge, confidence, recovery attitudes, advocacy and hope, and to explore their experience of the programme.

Methods:

A sequential design was used involving a pre–post survey to assess changes in knowledge, confidence, advocacy, recovery attitudes and hope following programme participation. In addition, semi-structured interviews with programme participants were completed. Fifty-three participants completed both pre- and post-surveys and twelve individuals consented to interviews.

Results:

The results demonstrated statistically significant changes in service users’ knowledge about mental health issues, confidence and advocacy. These improvements were reflected in the themes which emerged from the interviews with participants (n = 12), who reported enhanced knowledge and awareness of distress and wellness, and a greater sense of hope. In addition, the peer influence helped to normalise experiences for participants, while the dual facilitation engendered equality of participation and increased the opportunity for meaningful collaboration between service users and practitioners.

Conclusions:

The evaluation highlights the potential strengths of a service user and clinician co-facilitated education programme that acknowledges and respects the difference between the knowledge gained through self-experience and the knowledge gained through formal learning.

Keywords

Co-facilitationco-productionevaluationpeer facilitationpsychoeducationrecovery outcomes
Type
Original Research
Information
Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine , Volume 37 , Issue 2 , June 2020 , pp. 89 - 98
Copyright
© College of Psychiatrists of Ireland 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barber, J, Rosenheck, R, Armstrong, M, Resnick, S (2008). Monitoring the dissemination of peer support in the VA system. Community Mental Health Journal 44, 433–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bee, P, Price, O, Baker, J, Lovell, K (2015). Systematic synthesis of barriers and facilitators to service user-led care planning. The British Journal of Psychiatry 207(2), 104–114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Borkin, J, Steffan, J, Krzton, E, Wishnick, H, Wilder, K, Yangarber, N (2000). Recovery Attitudes Questionnaire: development and evaluation. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal 24(2), 95–102.10.1037/h0095112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradley, E (2016). Carers and Co-Production: enabling expertise through experience? Mental Health Review Journal 20(4), 232–241. ISBN 1361-9322.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brashers, D, Haas, S, Neidig, J (1999). The Patient Self-Advocacy Scale: measuring patient involvement in health care decision-making interactions. Health Communication 11(2), 97–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, JA, Copeland, ME, Corey, L, Buffington, E, Jonikas, JA, Curtis, LC, Grey, DD, Nichols, WH (2010). Developing the evidence base for peer-led services: changes among participants following Wellness Recovery Action Plan (WRAP) education in two state wide initiatives. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal 34, 113–120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cook, JA, Copeland, ME, Jonikas, JA, Hamilton, MM, Razzano, LA, Grey, DD, Floyd, CB, Hudson, WB, Macfarlane, RT, Carter, TM, Boyd, S (2011). Results of a randomized controlled trial of mental illness self-management using wellness recovery action planning. Schizophrenia Bulletin 38(4), 881–891.10.1080/09638230701482394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, L, Roe, D (2007). Recovery from versus recovery in serious mental illness: one strategy for lessening confusion plaguing recovery. Journal of Mental Health 16(4), 459–470.Google Scholar
Department of Health and Children (2006). A Vision for Change: Report of the Expert Group on Mental Health Policy. The Stationery Office: Dublin.Google Scholar
Department of Health and Children, Health Service Executive & Health Services National Partnership Forum (2008). National Strategy for Service User Involvement in the Irish Health Service: 2008–2013. Health Service Executive: Dublin.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Druss, B, Zhao, L, von Esenwein, S, Boma, J, Fricks, L, Jenkins-Tucker, S, Sterling, E, DiClemente, R, Lorig, K (2010). The Health and Recovery Peer (HARP) Program: a peer-led intervention to improve medical self-management for persons with serious mental illness. Schizophrenia Research 118(1–3), 264–270.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glaser, B.G, Strauss, A.L (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies or Qualitative Research. Transaction Publishers: Chicago.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Green, C.A, Janoff, SL, Yarborough, BJ, Paulson, RI (2013). The Recovery Group Project: development of an intervention led jointly by peer and professional counselors. Psychiatric Services 64, 1211–1217.Google Scholar
Grundy, C, Walker, L, Meade, O, Fraser, C, Cree, L, Bee, P, Lovell, K, Callaghan, P (2017). Evaluation of a co-delivered training package for community mental health professionals on service user- and carer-involved care planning, Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing 24, 358–366.Google Scholar
Health Service Executive (2017 a). Best Practice Guidance for Mental Health Services: Supporting you to meet Regulatory Requirements and towards Continuous Quality Improvement. Health Service Executive: Dublin. (https://www.hse.ie/eng/services/list/4/mental-health-services/mental-healthguidance/best-practice-guidance/documents/best-practice-guidance-for-mental-health-services.pdf). Accessed 10th July 2018.Google Scholar
Health Service Executive (2017 b). National Framework for Recovery in Mental Health: A National Framework for Mental Health Service Providers to Support the Delivery of a Quality, Person-Centered Service 2018–2020. Health Service Executive: Dublin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Health Service Executive (2018). Co-Production in Practice Guidance Document 2018–2020: Supporting the Implementation of ‘A National Framework for Recovery in Mental Health 2018–2020’. Health Service Executive: Dublin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Higgins, A, Hevey, D, Gibbons, P, O’Connor, C, Boyd, F, McBennett, P, Monahan, M (2017 a). A participatory approach to the development of a co-produced and co-delivered information programme for users of services and family members: the EOLAS programme (paper 1). Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine 34(1), 19–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Higgins, A, Hevey, D, Gibbons, P, O’Connor, C, Boyd, F, McBennett, P, Monahan, M (2017 b). Impact of co-facilitated information programmes on outcomes for service users and family members: the EOLAS programmes (paper 2). Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine 34(1), 29–37.Google Scholar
Higgins, A, Hevey, D, Boyd, F, Cusack, N, Downes, C, Monahan, M, McBennett, P, Gibbons, P (2018). Outcomes of a co-facilitation skills training programme for mental health service users, family members and clinicians: the EOLAS project. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing 27(2), 911–921.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Higgins, A, Hevey, D, Boyd, F, Cusack, N, Downes, C, Monahan, M, Gibbons, P (In press). Family members’ perspectives on the acceptability and impact of a co-facilitated information programme: the EOLAS mental health programme. Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jonikas, JA, Grey, DD, Copeland, ME, Razzano, LA, Hamilton, MM, Floyd, CB, Hudson, WB, Cook, JA (2013). Improving propensity for patient self-advocacy through wellness recovery action planning: results of a randomized controlled trial. Community Mental Health Journal 49(3), 260–269.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jormfeldt, H, Rask, M, Brunt, D, Bengtsson, A, Svedberg, P (2012). Experiences of a person-centred health education group intervention-a qualitative study among people with a persistent mental illness. Issues in Mental Health Nursing 33, 209–216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keogh, B, Morrissey, J, Higgins, A, Callaghan, P, deVries, J, Nash, M, Ryan, D, Gijbels, H (2014). ‘We have got the Tools’: qualitative evaluation of a Mental Health Wellness Recovery Action Planning (WRAP) education programme in Ireland. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing 21(3), 189–19610.1192/bjp.bp.110.083733CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lakeman, R, McGowan, P, MacGabhann, L, Parkinson, M, Redmond, M, Sibitz, I, Stevenson, C, Walsh, J (2012). A qualitative study exploring experiences of discrimination associated with mental-health problems in Ireland. Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences 21, 271–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leamy, M, Bird, V, Le Boutillier, C, Williams, J, Slade, M (2011). Conceptual framework for personal recovery in mental health: systematic review and narrative synthesis. The British Journal of Psychiatry 199(6), 445–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lefley, HP (2009). A psychoeducational support group for serious mental illness. The Journal for Specialists in Group Work 34, 369–381.Google Scholar
McNeil, S (2013). Understanding family-centered care in the mental health system: perspectives from family members caring for relatives with mental health issues. Social Work in Mental Health 11(1), 55–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O’Féich, P, Mitchell, K, Pérez, S, McDaid, S (2019). My Voice Matters: Report on a National Consultation with Mental Health Service Users.Mental Health Reform: Dublin.Google Scholar
Pickett, S, Diehl, S, Steigman, P, Prater, J, Fox, A, Cook, J (2010). Early outcomes and lessons learned from a study of the Building Recovery of Individual Dreams and Goals through Education and Support (BRIDGES) program in Tennessee. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal 34(2), 96–103.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Repper, J, Perkins, R (2003). Social Inclusion and Recovery.Bailliere Tindallagnes: London.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Resnick, S, Rosenheck, R (2008). Integrating peer-provided services: a quasi-experimental study of recovery orientation, confidence and empowerment. Psychiatric Services 59, 1307–1314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reupert, A, Maybery, D, Cox, M, Scott Stokes, E (2015). Place of family in recovery models for those with a mental illness. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing 24(6), 495–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salkeld, R, Wagstaff, C, Tew, J (2013). Toward a new way of relating: an evaluation of recovery training delivered jointly to service users and staff. Journal of Mental Health 22(2), 165–173.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salzer, MS & Mental Health Association of Southeastern Pennsylvania Best Practices Team (2002). Consumer delivered services as a best practice in mental health care and the development of practice guidelines. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Skills 6, 355–382.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Slade, M, Amering, M, Farkas, M, Hamilton, B, O’Hagan, M, Panther, G, Perkins, R, Shepherd, G, Tse, S, Whitley, R (2014). Uses and abuses of recovery: implementing recovery-oriented practices in mental health systems. World Psychiatry 13(1), 12–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swarbrick, MA (2013). Wellness-oriented peer approaches: a key ingredient for integrated care. Psychiatric Services 64(8), 723–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Topor, A, Borg, M, Mezzina, R, Sells, D, Marin, I, Davidson, L (2006). Others: the role of family, friends, and professionals in the recovery process. American Journal of Psychiatric Rehabilitation 9(1), 17–37.10.1108/MHRJ-05-2014-0017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tse, S, Tsoi, EWS, Wong, S (2014). Training of mental health peer support workers in a non-western high-income city: preliminary evaluation and experience. International Journal of Social Psychiatry 60(3), 211–218.Google Scholar
Turner, A, Realpe, AX, Wallace, LM, Kosmala-Anderson, J (2015). A co-produced self-management programme improves psychosocial outcomes for people living with depression. Mental Health Review Journal 20(4), 242–255.Google Scholar
Watts, M, Higgins, A (2017). Narratives of Recovery from Mental Illness: Role of Peer Support.Routledge Taylor and Francis Group: Oxon and New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
World Health Organization (2010). User Empowerment in Mental Health: A Statement by the WHO Regional Office for Europe.World Health Organization: Copenhagen.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wyder, M, Bland, R (2014). The recovery framework as a way of understanding families’ responses to mental illness: balancing different needs and recovery journeys. Australian Social Work 67(2), 179–196.Google Scholar