Grupo de apoio com pacientes psiquiátricos ambulatoriais em contexto institucional: análise do manejo terapêutico

Guanaes, Carla; Japur, Marisa

doi:10.1590/s0102-79722001000100016

Cited by 11 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 5 publications

(10 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This emphasis on dialogue has inspired innovative healthcare practices in a variety of contexts such as lesbian, gay and transgender health [24], HIV and aids [25], eating disorders [27], family health [5], mental health [16], substance abuse [7] and client-professional communication [28]. Common to all these practices is the embracement of a collaborative approach in which all the involved are co-creating possibilities with and from their expertises.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health 2.0: Relational Resources for the Development of Quality in Healthcare

Camargo-Borges

Moscheta

2014

Health Care Anal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Traditional approaches in healthcare have been challenged giving way to broader forms of users' participation in treatment. In this article we present the Health 2.0 movement as an example of relational and participatory practices in healthcare. Health 2.0 is an approach in which participation is the major aim, aspiring to reshape the system into more collaborative and less hierarchical relationships. We offer two illustrations in order to discuss how Health 2.0 is related and can contribute to a positive uptake of patient's knowledge, which implies challenging healthcare practices exclusively focused on scientific expertise. In contrast, the illustrations we discuss focus on relations and cultural practices, searching for responsive and context-sensitive interventions, entertaining multiple views and allowing space for creativity. Finally we introduce two relational resources to contribute with the development and sustainability of Health 2.0 practices: Relational being and edge of fluidity. Those are resources aiming to engage professionals in a type of conversation with their clients, which is different from the hierarchical, linear and fact-oriented approach. This conversation aims at creating a space where the voices of all involved are welcomed, raising different opinions and points of view, bringing up new light and possibilities to the problem being investigated. These resources may be useful for those who are interested in improving quality in healthcare by investing in collaboration, contextual sensitivity and relational engagement.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health 2.0: Relational Resources for the Development of Quality in Healthcare

Camargo-Borges

Moscheta

2014

Health Care Anal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The main complaints that motivated the search for treatment in the service included depression, anxiety and relationship difficulties. Information from the medical records indicated that the patients were experiencing, at the time of referral, a crisis situation in a life history marked by difficulties and psychosocial adaptation problems (Guanaes & Japur, 2001). …”

Section: Context and Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Specifically, support groups began to be used as tools for care in different contexts and later spread as resources for healthcare (Guanaes & Japur, 2001). As summarized by Schopler and Galinsky (1993), the proliferation of these groups is related to the growing need for support determined by the rapid social changes, which increased the experience of stressful situations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, this type of group seeks to help people to face difficult emotional situations and to cope with quotidian stresses, moments of life transition and economic problems. Generally, they have a limited duration (Klein, 1993), valuing the exchange of experiences and seeking the relief of symptoms through non-interpretive therapeutic management, focusing on the acceptance, the support and the offer of guidance (Guanaes & Japur, 2001). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The management of social problems talk in a support group

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The comprehension of the health-disease process from a multifactorial perspective has allowed important transformations in the healthcare practices. In this article, we discuss the use of the support group as a resource for mental health care, analyzing how conversations about social issues are managed in this context. Based on contributions from the social constructionist movement, we analyzed the transcripts of the conversations developed in meetings of a support group offered to patients of a mental health outpatient clinic. The analysis of the process of meaning making indicates that the discourse of the social influence on mental health is not legitimized, due to a predominant individualistic discourse, which psychologizes care and is centered on the emotional analysis of the problems of the quotidian. We argue that this mode of management brings limits to the construction of the group as a device for promoting autonomy and encouraging the social transformation processes.Keywords: social constructionism; mental health; support groups; social determinants of health. RESUMOA compreensão do processo saúde-doença a partir de uma perspectiva multifatorial tem permitido importantes transformações nas práticas de saúde. Neste artigo, discutimos o uso do grupo de apoio como um recurso para os cuidados de saúde mental, analisando como as conversas sobre as questões sociais são manejadas neste contexto. Com base nas contribuições do movimento construcionista social, analisou as transcrições das conversas desenvolvidas nas reuniões de um grupo de apoio oferecido aos pacientes de um ambulatório de saúde mental. A análise do processo de construção de significado indica que o discurso da influência social sobre a saúde mental não é legitimado, devido a um discurso individualista predominante, que psicologiza cuidado e é centrado na análise emocional dos problemas do cotidiano. Argumenta-se que este modo de manejo traz limites para a construção do grupo como um dispositivo para promover a autonomia e incentivar os processos de transformação social.Palavras-chave: construcionismo social; saúde mental; grupos de apoio; determinantes sociais da saúde.

show abstract

“…To research the universe of entities that represent rheumatology patients around Brazil, the following strategies were employed: [1] Analysis in the site of the Brazilian Society of Rheumatology (SBR); [2] Analysis in the sites of each one of the Regional Societies of Rheumatology; [3] Personal contact with Group of Arthritic Patients of São Paulo (GRUPASP); [4] Contact by telephone with the National Association of Arthritic Patients (ANAPAR); [5] Google research, using the following search tools: main rheumatic diseases described by SBR and the following words: "support groups" or "patient association".…”

Section: Identification Of the Studied Universementioning

confidence: 99%

Caracterização dos grupos de apoio e associações de pacientes portadores de doença reumatológica no Brasil

Moretti¹,

Zucchi²

2010

Rev. Bras. Reumatol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To analyze organizational characteristics of support groups that represent rheumatic patients in the Brazilian states. Methods: Initially a mapping of the desired universe was made. Contact was attempted with all organizations and they were asked to answer a structuralized electronic questionnaire with the purpose of understanding the profile of these organizations (developed initiatives, legal aspects, difficulties, strong points, among others). Results: 45 organizations were identified. They predominate in the south and southeastern regions of the country. Of the total, 30% have a website and 50% presented difficulties to establish contact with. Of the 12 organizations that answered to the questionnaire, 5 had closed, one is on a construction phase, and the remaining was not possible to establish contact with, or did not answer the research. Of the organizations that answered the questionnaire, only one declared having an OSCIP title (Civil Social Organization of Public Interest) or a Social Organization title and only one declared being registered at the National Council of Social Assistance (CNAS). Moreover, 50% did not present a public utility title, 25% were registered in a registry office and only 1/3 declared being registered in the City Council of Social Assistance (CMAS). Conclusions: The studied groups present heterogeneous characteristics. Of the organizations studied, some showed to be more solid and well-structured, but others showed important intrinsic difficulties, with an incipient profile or characteristics that demonstrate little survival expectation.

show abstract

Grupo de apoio com pacientes psiquiátricos ambulatoriais em contexto institucional: análise do manejo terapêutico

Cited by 11 publications

References 5 publications

Health 2.0: Relational Resources for the Development of Quality in Healthcare

Health 2.0: Relational Resources for the Development of Quality in Healthcare

The management of social problems talk in a support group

Caracterização dos grupos de apoio e associações de pacientes portadores de doença reumatológica no Brasil

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About