Using a digital personal recovery resource in routine mental health practice: feasibility, acceptability and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Digital technologies enable the dissemination of multimedia resources to support adults with serious mental illness in their self-management and personal recovery. However, delivery needs to accommodate engagement and accessibility challenges. AIMS: We examined how a digital resource, designed for mental health workers and consumers to use together in session, would be used in routine practice. METHODS: Thirty consumers and their workers participated. The web-based resource, Self-Management And Recovery Technology (SMART), was available to use within and between sessions, for a 6-month period. Workers initiated in-session use where relevant. Feasibility was explored via uptake and usage data; and acceptability and impact via questionnaires. A pre-post design assessed recovery outcomes for consumers and relationship outcomes for consumers and workers. RESULTS: In participating mental health practitioner-consumer dyads, consumers gave strong acceptability ratings, and reported improved working relationships. However, the resource was typically used in one-third or fewer appointments, with consumers expressing a desire for greater in-session use. Improvements in self-rated personal recovery were not observed, possibly contributed to by low usage. CONCLUSIONS: In-session use was found helpful by consumers but may be constrained by other demands in mental health care delivery: collaborative use may require dedicated staff time or more formal implementation.

Do recovery-oriented messages improve self-efficacy and positive emotions amongst people with lived experience of psychosis? Experimental investigation.

OBJECTIVES: Recovery-oriented perspectives have become accepted worldwide as an alternative to the biomedical approach to conceptualizing and managing severe mental health problems. It has been proposed that one advantage of this is to support self-efficacy amongst people with a lived experience of psychosis, especially when recovery messages are presented by lived experience peers. The aim of the present study was to investigate the proposed psychological benefits of the recovery paradigm, by testing for possible differential impacts of recovery versus biomedical messages on self-efficacy beliefs and positive emotional state amongst people with experience of psychosis. It was hypothesized that (1) recovery-oriented messages, when presented by lived experience peers, would generate improvements in self-efficacy and positive emotions relative to biomedical messages presented by a professional and (2) recovery-oriented messages delivered by a professional would generate improvements in self-efficacy and positive emotions relative to biomedical messages delivered by a professional. We also explored whether recovery-oriented messages were more impactful when delivered by a lived experience peer versus a professional. DESIGN: Experimental design with three within-subject video-based conditions. METHODS: Fifty-three participants with lived experience of psychosis viewed three videos: (i) people with lived experience sharing their experiences of recovery; (ii) mental health professionals presenting traditional biomedical conceptualizations of psychosis; and (iii) mental health professionals presenting recovery perspectives. Participants provided baseline clinical and demographic information, and post-viewing ratings of experienced changes in self-efficacy and emotional state. RESULTS: Hypothesis 1 was supported: both self-efficacy and positive emotions were significantly increased by a video of peers sharing personal recovery stories relative to professionals presenting biomedical messages. Hypothesis 2 was partially supported: when comparing videos of recovery versus biomedical messages delivered by professionals, significant relative benefits were found for positive emotions, but not self-efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: This experimental investigation generated a pattern of findings broadly supportive of the assumed psychological benefits of the recovery paradigm for people with lived experiences of psychosis. Findings must be interpreted with caution given the limitations of the present design, but encourage further experimental research to directly test the interpersonal impacts of the recovery paradigm.

Randomised controlled trial of a digitally assisted low intensity intervention to promote personal recovery in persisting psychosis: SMART-Therapy study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Psychosocial interventions have an important role in promoting recovery in people with persisting psychotic disorders such as schizophrenia. Readily available, digital technology provides a means of developing therapeutic resources for use together by practitioners and mental health service users. As part of the Self-Management and Recovery Technology (SMART) research program, we have developed an online resource providing materials on illness self-management and personal recovery based on the Connectedness-Hope-Identity-Meaning-Empowerment (CHIME) framework. Content is communicated using videos featuring persons with lived experience of psychosis discussing how they have navigated issues in their own recovery. This was developed to be suitable for use on a tablet computer during sessions with a mental health worker to promote discussion about recovery. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a rater-blinded randomised controlled trial comparing a low intensity recovery intervention of eight one-to-one face-to-face sessions with a mental health worker using the SMART website alongside routine care, versus an eight-session comparison condition, befriending. The recruitment target is 148 participants with a schizophrenia-related disorder or mood disorder with a history of psychosis, recruited from mental health services in Victoria, Australia. Following baseline assessment, participants are randomised to intervention, and complete follow up assessments at 3, 6 and 9 months post-baseline. The primary outcome is personal recovery measured using the Process of Recovery Questionnaire (QPR). Secondary outcomes include positive and negative symptoms assessed with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, subjective experiences of psychosis, emotional symptoms, quality of life and resource use. Mechanisms of change via effects on self-stigma and self-efficacy will be examined. DISCUSSION: This protocol describes a novel intervention which tests new therapeutic methods including in-session tablet computer use and video-based peer modelling. It also informs a possible low intensity intervention model potentially viable for delivery across the mental health workforce. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02474524 , 24 May 2015, retrospectively registered during the recruitment phase.

Promoting Personal Recovery in People with Persisting Psychotic Disorders: Development and Pilot Study of a Novel Digital Intervention.

BACKGROUND: For people with persisting psychotic disorders, personal recovery has become an important target of mental health services worldwide. Strongly influenced by mental health service consumer perspectives, personal recovery refers to being able to live a satisfying and contributing life irrespective of ongoing symptoms and disability. Contact with peers with shared lived experience is often cited as facilitative of recovery. We aimed to develop and pilot a novel recovery-based digitally supported intervention for people with a psychotic illness. METHODS: We developed a website to be used on a tablet computer by mental health workers to structure therapeutic discussions about personal recovery. Central to the site was a series of video interviews of people with lived experience of psychosis discussing how they had navigated issues within their own recovery based on the Connectedness-Hope-Identity-Meaning-Empowerment model of recovery. We examined the feasibility and acceptability of an 8-session low intensity intervention using this site in 10 participants with persisting psychotic disorders and conducted a proof-of-concept analysis of outcomes. RESULTS: All 10 participants completed the full course of sessions, and it was possible to integrate use of the website into nearly all sessions. Participant feedback confirmed that use of the website was a feasible and acceptable way of working. All participants stated that they would recommend the intervention to others. Post-intervention, personal recovery measured by the Questionnaire for the Process of Recovery had improved by an average standardized effect of d = 0.46, 95% CI [0.07, 0.84], and 8 of the 10 participants reported that their mental health had improved since taking part in the intervention. CONCLUSION: In-session use of digital resources featuring peer accounts of recovery is feasible and acceptable and shows promising outcomes. A randomized controlled trial is the next step in evaluating the efficacy of this low intensity intervention when delivered in conjunction with routine mental health care.