The aim of this study is to obtain insight, from a patient's perspective, into the results and essential components of treatment in specialist settings for so-called ‘difficult’ patients in mental health care. In cases where usual hospital treatment is not successful, a temporary transfer to another, specialist hospital may provide a solution. We investigated which aspects of specialist treatment available to ‘difficult’ patients are perceived as essential by the patients and what are the results of this treatment in their perception. A qualitative research design based on the Grounded Theory method was used. To generate data, 14 semi-structured interviews were held with 12 patients who were admitted to a specialist hospital in the Netherlands. Almost all respondents rated the results of the specialist treatment as positive. The therapeutic climate was perceived as extremely strict, with a strong focus on structure, cooperation and safety. This approach had a stabilizing effect on the patients, even at times when they were not motivated. Most patients developed a motivation for change, marked by a growing and more explicit determination of their future goals. We concluded that a highly structured treatment environment aimed at patient stabilization is helpful to most ‘difficult’ patients.
DOCUMENT
Measures such as ‘ethical AI’ and ‘good data’ will not bring about social justice, end racial capitalism or forestall climate disaster. How to channel discontent and counter-hegemony into an actual transfer of power in the late platform age?
MULTIFILE
The road to science for the arts therapies requires research on the full breadths of the spectrum, from systematic case studies to RCTs. It is important that arts therapists and arts therapeutic researchers reflect on the typical characteristics of each research paradigm, research type and research method and select what is appropriate with regard to the particular research question. Questions rather differ. Finding out whether a certain intervention has a particular effect with a large group of clients differs from wanting to know which change occurs at which moment by which interventions in the treatment of an individual client. Research in practice remains close to questions encountered by arts therapists in their daily practice. It concerns questions arts therapists have about their lived experience of acting due to the complexity and variability of practice. By carrying out research in practice that links up with those questions, evidence evolves; evidence that enables the professional to proceed and that makes explicit what often remains implicit and unsaid. What is explicit can be communicated, can be criticised and tested. The professional himself does the road to science of the profession. The investment in professionals’ research in practice is the motor of knowledge-productivity that bridges the theory-practice gap. Research in the arts therapies should lead to ‘knowledge’ in which the ‘art’, nor the ‘subject’ of therapist and client have been lost.
DOCUMENT
