Peer support for discharge from inpatient to community mental health services: Study protocol clinical trial (SPIRIT Compliant)
KeywordCosts and cost analysis
Mental health services
Quality of life
Community mental health service
MetadataShow full item record
AbstractINTRODUCTION: In the period shortly after discharge from inpatient to community mental health care, people are at increased risk of self-harm, suicide, and readmission to hospital. Discharge interventions including peer support have shown potential, and there is some evidence that community-based peer support reduces readmissions. However, systematic reviews of peer support in mental health services indicate poor trial quality and a lack of reporting of how peer support is distinctive from other mental health support. This study is designed to establish the clinical and cost effectiveness of a peer worker intervention to support discharge from inpatient to community mental health care, and to address issues of trial quality and clarity of reporting of peer support interventions. METHODS: This protocol describes an individually randomized controlled superiority trial, hypothesizing that people offered a peer worker discharge intervention in addition to usual follow-up care in the community are less likely to be readmitted in the 12 months post discharge than people receiving usual care alone. A total of 590 people will be recruited shortly before discharge from hospital and randomly allocated to care as usual plus the peer worker intervention or care as usual alone. Manualized peer support provided by trained peer workers begins in hospital and continues for 4 months in the community post discharge. Secondary psychosocial outcomes are assessed at 4 months post discharge, and service use and cost outcomes at 12 months post discharge, alongside a mixed methods process evaluation. DISCUSSION: Clearly specified procedures for sequencing participant allocation and for blinding assessors to allocation, plus full reporting of outcomes, should reduce risk of bias in trial findings and contribute to improved quality in the peer support evidence base. The involvement of members of the study team with direct experience of peer support, mental distress, and using mental health services, in coproducing the intervention and designing the trial, ensures that we theorize and clearly describe the peer worker intervention, and evaluate how peer support is related to any change in outcome. This is an important methodological contribution to the evidence base. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was prospectively registered as ISRCTN 10043328 on November 28, 2016.
CitationGillard, S., Bremner, S., Foster, R., Gibson, S. L., Goldsmith, L., Healey, A., Lucock, M., Marks, J., Morshead, R., Patel, A., et al. (2020). Peer support for discharge from inpatient to community mental health services: Study protocol clinical trial (SPIRIT Compliant). Medicine, 99 (10), pp.e19192.
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Development of a peer support intervention to improve the experience and outcomes of discharge from inpatient mental health care: the role of experiential knowledge in a coproduced approachRepper, Julie (2021)OBJECTIVES: Peer support is rapidly being introduced into mental health services internationally, yet peer support interventions are often poorly described, limiting the usefulness of research in informing policy and practice. This paper reports the development of a peer support intervention that aims to improve outcomes of discharge from inpatient to community mental health care. People with experiential knowledge of using mental health services-peer workers and service user researchers-were involved in all stages of developing the intervention: generating intervention components; producing the intervention handbook; piloting the intervention. RESULTS: Systematic review and expert panels, including our Lived Experience Advisory Panel, identified 66 candidate intervention components in five domains: Recruitment and Role Description of Peer Workers; Training for Peer Workers; Delivery of Peer Support; Supervision and Support for Peer Workers; Organisation and Team. A series of Local Advisory Groups were used to prioritise components and explore implementation issues using consensus methods, refining an intervention blueprint. A peer support handbook and peer worker training programme were produced by the study team and piloted in two study sites. Feedback workshops were held with peer workers and their supervisors to produce a final handbook and training programme. The ENRICH trial is registered with the ISRCTN clinical trial register, number ISRCTN 10043328, and was overseen by an independent steering committee and a data monitoring committee.
Relational fragility, development and an emerging self: service user views of engaging in an IIRMS in the OPD pathwayGordon, Frances; Gordon, Neil (2019)Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to gain an in-depth view into how participants perceived their experience of engaging in an enhanced Intensive Intervention and Risk Management Service (IIRMS), which is a part of the Offender Personality Disorder (OPD) pathway based within the community. Design/methodology/approach: Five participants were interviewed. They were at different points of engagement with the service. Interviews were taped, transcribed and analysed using the grounded theory methodology. Findings: Participants were able to provide in-depth reflections about their experiences at the service. The main issues centred upon "managing fragile relationships" and "an emerging self". Subcategories linked to managing fragile relationships were: "letting people in and keeping them away"; "surviving the ruptures"; and "treating me like a person". Subcategories linked to an emerging self were: "readiness to change" and "making new connections". Research limitations/implications: This study focused upon one enhanced IIRMS and findings are not necessarily generalisable to other services within the OPD pathway, although themes are likely to resonate for those leaving custody with complex interpersonal difficulties. Practical implications: This study has provided access to participants' perspectives on engaging with an IIRMS. Many factors impact upon the individual's journey, which is central to the relational approach underpinning the pathway. Originality/value: The findings have important messages for service providers and commissioners and crucially service user perspectives have been obtained that are integral to future development of the OPD pathway. The findings are also relevant for released prisoners attempting to reintegrate within the community.
Management of a high-performing mental health recovery research groupSlade, Mike (2021)A personal perspective is given on the processes involved in managing and sustaining a high-performing mental health recovery research group. The broader context of scholarship in the United Kingdom is outlined, in which academic productivity is commodified specifically in relation to peer-reviewed journal papers. Four leadership choices in developing a high-performing research group are discussed: optimal group size; sharing the workload; maintaining a programmatic focus; and performance expectations. Approaches to maximising innovation are identified, including emotional and intellectual engagement of team members, working with diverse stakeholders and convening communities of practice. We use a highly managed approach to publications from inception to acceptance, which is described in detail. The use of these approaches is illustrated in relation to the Recovery Research Team which was formed in 2009. Specific recovery-related issues covered include demonstrating the ability to develop a significant recovery research portfolio (our four current large [>UK£2 m] studies relate to recovery narratives, global mental health peer support work, digital interventions and Recovery Colleges); the positive implications of actively recruiting researchers with mental health lived experience; how performance issues are managed; our approach to involving lived experience co-authors in papers; and our decision to conduct mixed-methods rather than solely qualitative studies.