Processes towards employment among persons with psychiatric disabilities: a study of two individual placement and support programmes in Sweden

Abstract

Individual placement and support (IPS) has been found to be an effective intervention for rehabilitation to work in the field of mental health. Being as the principles used in IPS reflect core values in the concept of personal recovery, several other outcomes than just the percentage of clients gaining employment are of interest. The purpose of the study was to describe a number of unique processes and analyze these with a special concern for circumstances perceived as important for the individual IPS process. A collective instrumental case-study design was used and five cases were included. Data from three different sources were collected, both quantitative and qualitative. The findings illustrate how a relationship characterized by curiosity, interest and engagement in the individual client, positive risk-taking and time for reflected experiences resulted in processes of change. It was concluded that providing IPS is a type of specialized relationship-based work that includes advanced problem solving.

Stakeholder Perspectives on IPS for Employment: A Scoping Review

“…Studies targeting solely clients of IPS accounted for most of the articles retrieved ( n = 15, 57.7%) (Alverson et al, 1995; Areberg et al, 2013; Becker et al, 2007, Besse et al, 2017, 2018; Boycott et al, 2015; Coombes et al, 2016; Gammelgaard et al, 2017; Huff et al, 2008; Johnson et al, 2009; Koletsi et al, 2009; Lexen et al, 2013a, 2013b; Liu et al, 2007; Nygren et al, 2016). An additional four articles focused on clients among other stakeholders (15.4%).…”

“…Eight studies stated they used a grounded theory approach ( n = 8, 30.8%; Becker et al, 2007; Besse et al, 2017, 2018; Coombes et al, 2016; Glover & Frounfelker, 2011, 2013; Lexen et al, 2016; Liu et al, 2007). Seven studies stated they used content analysis ( n = 7, 26.9%; Areberg et al, 2013; Glover & Frounfelker, 2013; Hasson et al, 2011; Kostick et al, 2010; Nunes et al, 2011; Nygren et al, 2016; Salyers et al, 2008; Whitley et al, 2010), which included purely inductive content analysis, deductive content analysis, and directed content analysis approach. Four studies reported using case study design ( n = 4, 15.4%; Bejerholm et al, 2011; Crain et al, 2009; Lexen et al, 2013a, 2013b) which included an instrumental case study approach, an embedded case study design, a case style analysis, and a multiple case study design.…”

“…From the 26 articles identified by this review, 9 studies were written by occupational therapists and all mentioned “occupational therapy” at least once ( n = 9, 34.6%; Areberg et al, 2013; Bejerholm et al, 2011; Coombes et al, 2016; Hasson et al, 2011; Lexen et al, 2013a, 2013b; Lexen et al, 2016; Liu et al, 2007; Nygren et al, 2016). Furthermore, 2 studies that were not written by occupational therapists mentioned “occupational therapy” (Crain et al, 2009; Johnson et al, 2009).…”

“…Furthermore, 2 studies that were not written by occupational therapists mentioned “occupational therapy” (Crain et al, 2009; Johnson et al, 2009). From these 11 studies in total, 6 were conducted in Sweden ( n = 6, 54.5%; Areberg et al, 2013; Bejerholm et al, 2011; Hasson et al, 2011; Lexen et al, 2013a, 2013b; Nygren et al, 2016), 2 in Canada ( n = 2, 18.2%; Besse et al, 2018; Nunes et al, 2011), and the rest were from other countries.…”

“…In terms of the use of occupational therapy models and assessments, Lexen et al’s (2013b) study used the person–environment–occupation model to structure their analysis, and Nygren et al’s (2016) study used the occupational self-assessment questionnaire to collect data on occupational competence and value. The extent of the remaining articles’ focus on occupational therapists’ role within IPS was minimal with most articles simply stating that an occupational therapist was part of the mental health team.…”