‘I‐as‐We’ – Powerful boundaries within the field of mental health coproduction

Peter, Sebastian von; Schulz, Gesa

doi:10.1111/inm.12469

Cited by 9 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…4 Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Medical University Brandenburg, Neuruppin, Germany. 5 Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy I, Ulm University, ZfP Südwürttemberg, Ravensburg, Germany. 6 University Psychiatric Services Bern, Bern, Switzerland.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Psychometric evaluation of the German version of the Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers (OMS-HC)

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Healthcare professionals can be a source of stigma and discrimination for people with mental illness, and anti-stigma programs are needed for this target group. However, there is no validated German language scale to assess attitudes of healthcare professionals towards people with mental illness. This study had the aim to validate the German language version of the Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers (OMS-HC), a self-report measure of stigmatizing attitudes. Methods Staff (n = 392) on general psychiatric inpatient wards (excluding child, forensic and geriatric psychiatry) at five psychiatric hospitals in Switzerland (n = 3) and Germany (n = 2) participated in the study. The internal consistency of the OMS-HC was examined as well as its factor structure using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. To assess the scale’s concurrent validity, we used the Social Distance Scale. Results Internal consistency for the OMS-HC total score was good (α = 0.74), acceptable for the subscales Attitudes (α = 0.62) and Social Distance (α = 0.69), and poor for the Disclosure subscale (α = 0.55). The original three-factor structure fit our data well. The OMS-HC total score and the Social Distance subscale score were significantly correlated with the Social Distance Scale, supporting concurrent validity. Conclusion The German version of the OMS-HC demonstrated satisfactory psychometric properties and can be recommended for future research and intervention evaluation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An explanation may be the perceived difference between HCP and PWM, i.e. that "they" (PWM) are completely different from "us" (HCP) [4,5]. Stigma experienced or anticipated by PWM can impair the therapeutic relationship with HCPs, which in turn has a negative impact on the recovery process [6][7][8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychometric evaluation of the German version of the Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers (OMS-HC)

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Vis et al [89] Excluded A scoping review. Von Peter and Schulz [90] Excluded Psychiatrist perspective of what hinders co-production.…”

Section: Simmons Et Al [80] Excludedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Co-Production within Child and Adolescent Mental Health: A Systematic Review

Norton

2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Mental health services are currently experiencing much systemic and organisational change. Many countries have adopted a recovery approach to service provision through the development of national policies and frameworks. Within an Irish context, co-production has been identified as one of the four pillars required for services to become recovery orientated. However, there is a paucity of literature relating to the concept within child and adolescent mental health services. This paper aims to synthesise the peer-reviewed evidence on co-production within such services. Methods: A PRISMA compliant systematic review was undertaken. This includes how the reviewer retrieved, shortlisted, and selected studies for inclusion in the review. It outlines the inclusion/exclusion criteria and how these were further developed through the PICO framework. Finally, the methods also outline how the reviewer assessed bias and quality, as well as the process of data synthesis. Results: Two studies were included in this review, both focusing on co-production, but in different contexts within child and adolescent mental health. Two themes were identified: ‘road less travelled’ and ‘co-producing equality’. These themes and the associated sub-themes describe how co-production works in these services. Discussion: These results highlight the paucity of quality literature in co-production within child and adolescent mental health. Both studies scored poorly in terms of quality. Resulting from this review, a number of actions relating to the therapeutic environment need to be taken into account for co-production to be further implemented. Other: The reviewer has not received any funding for this paper. A protocol was not created or registered for this review.

show abstract

“…Schulz (in von Peter and Schulz [50]) a psychiatry-user and peer support worker (or recovery companion), describes what a good therapeutic stance might look like:For me, a good therapist doesn't have to speak about his ruptures, or tell me about his problems. It's important for me that I can feel that this person has experienced a lot.…”

Section: Openness and Authenticity: The Dialogical Stancementioning

confidence: 99%

Person-Centered Psychiatry as Dialogical Psychiatry: The Significance of the Therapeutic Stance

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we present holistic and <i>person-centered</i> perspectives in psychiatry, with the aim of better understanding what a focus on personhood might really mean and what clinical implications it might have. We first introduce classical and philosophical concepts of personhood, in order to then outline person-centered approaches in psychiatry, which mainly focus on the person of the patient. We then argue that, for it to really be person-centered, psychiatry must necessarily also focus on the person of professionals. We thus explore the notion of stance, as the expression of the therapist’s personhood. By unpacking the effects that a professional’s stance can have on patients, we finally turn to a consideration of the interpersonal sphere. More specifically, we propose clinical considerations on a therapeutic stance that strives to support and to help the person of the patient unfold. Such a stance must – we argue – necessarily be a dialogical one. Drawing on these considerations, we thus claim that a truly person-centered approach in psychiatry must necessarily and automatically be <i>interperson-centered</i> and dialogical. In the concluding remarks, we finally discuss broader societal implications and outline future research perspectives.

show abstract

‘I‐as‐We’ – Powerful boundaries within the field of mental health coproduction

Cited by 9 publications

References 18 publications

Psychometric evaluation of the German version of the Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers (OMS-HC)

Psychometric evaluation of the German version of the Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers (OMS-HC)

Co-Production within Child and Adolescent Mental Health: A Systematic Review

Person-Centered Psychiatry as Dialogical Psychiatry: The Significance of the Therapeutic Stance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About