This thesis describes an Action Research (AR) project aimed at the implementation of Evidence Based Practice in a mental health nursing setting in the Netherlands. The main research question addressed in this thesis is: In what way is Action Research with an empowering appropriate to implement Evidence Based Practice in a mental health nursing setting in the Netherlands and what is the effect of this implementation on the care experienced by the client, the nursing interventions and the context in this setting compared to a comparative setting? To answer this main research question, the following questions derived from it were addressed: What is Evidence Based Practice? What is known about implementing evidence-based practice in nursing through Action Research? Which factors have to be dealt with in a mental health nursing setting, so the implementation of EBP with AR with an empowering intent will be more successful? Which factors have to be dealt with in a mental health nursing setting, so the implementation of EBP with AR with an empowering intent will be successful? How is EBP implemented through AR with an empowering intent and what are the outcomes for the use of evidence, the context and the facilitation in the setting? What is the effect of the implementation of EBP in mental health nursing using AR with an empowering intent on the care experienced by the client, the nursing interventions and the context compared to a comparison setting? The first two questions were answered by a search of the literature while the remaining questions were answered during the AR study conducted in two mental health organisations in the Netherlands.
DOCUMENT
Accessible Summary What is known on the subject? • Mentalizing is the capacity to understand both one‘s own and other people‘s behaviour in terms of mental states, such as, for example, desires, feelings and beliefs. • The mentalizing capacities of healthcare professionals help to establish effective therapeutic relationships and, in turn, lead to better patient outcomes. What this paper adds to existing knowledge? • The personal factors positively associated with the mentalizing capacities of healthcare professionals are being female, greater work experience and having a more secure attachment style. Psychosocial factors are having personal experience with psychotherapy, burnout, and in the case of female students, being able to identify with the female psychotherapist role model during training. There is limited evidence that training programmes can improve mentalizing capacities. • Although the mentalization field is gaining importance and research is expanding, the implications for mental health nursing have not been previously reviewed. Mental health nurses are underrepresented in research on the mentalizing capacities of healthcare professionals. This is significant given that mental health nurses work closest to patients and thus are more often confronted with patients‘ behaviour compared to other health care professionals, and constitute a large part of the workforce in mental healthcare for patients with mental illness. What are the implications for practice? • Given the importance of mentalizing capacity of both the patient and the nurse for a constructive working relationship, it is important that mental health nurses are trained in the basic principles of mentalization. Mental health nurses should be able to recognize situations where patients‘ lack of ability to mentalize creates difficulties in the interaction. They should also be able to recognize their own difficulties with mentalizing and be sensitive to the communicative implications this may have.
MULTIFILE
Introduction F-ACT is a flexible version of Assertive Community Treatment to deliver care in a changing intensity depending on needs of individuals with severe mental illnesses (Van Veldhuizen, 2007). In 2016 a number of the FACT-teams in the Dutch region of Utrecht moved to locations in neighborhoods and started to work as one network team together with neighborhood based facilities in primary care (GP’s) and in the social domain (supported living, social district teams, etc.). This should create better chances on clinical, social and personal recovery of service users. Objectives This study describes the implementation, obstacles and outcomes for service users. The main question is whether this Collaborative Mental Health Care in the Community produces better outcome than regular FACT. Measures include (met/unmet) needs for care, quality of life, clinical, functional and personal recovery, and hospital admission days. Methods Data on care utilization regarding the innovation are compared to regular FACT. Qualitative interviews are conducted to gain insight in the experiences of service users, their family members and mental health care workers. Changes in outcome measures of service users in pilot areas (N=400) were compared to outcomes of users (matched on gender and level of functioning) in regular FACT teams in the period 2015-2018 (total N=800). Results Data-analyses will take place from January to March 2019. Initial analyses point at a greater feeling of holding and safety for service users in the pilot areas and less hospital admission days. Conclusions Preliminary results support the development from FACT to a community based collaborative care service.
DOCUMENT
