Do recovery outcome measures improve clinical practice? A linguistic analysis of the impact of the Hope, Agency and Opportunity measure in community mental health teams
Do recovery outcome measures improve clinical practice? A linguistic analysis of the impact of the Hope, Agency and Opportunity measure in community mental health teams
Aims:
Recovery approaches are identified as the overarching framework for improving mental health services for people with severe and enduring conditions. These approaches prioritise living well with long-term conditions, as evidenced by personal recovery outcomes. There is little research demonstrating how to support busy mental health teams, work in this way. This study assessed the impact of introducing a brief measure of recovery, the Hope, Agency and Opportunity (HAO), on the attitudes and behaviours of staff working in community mental health teams, to test whether routine use of such measures facilitates recovery-based practice.
Methods:
Linguistic analysis assumes that language is indicative of wider attitudes and behaviours. Anonymised clinical notes recorded by community mental health team clinicians were analysed for recovery and non-recovery language, over 30 months. This covered periods before, during and after the introduction of the recovery measure. We used a single-case design (N = 1 community mental health team) and hypothesised that clinicians would use recovery-focused language more frequently, and non-recovery-focused language less frequently, following the introduction of the measure, and that these changes would be maintained at 18-month follow-up.
Results:
Visual inspection of the data indicated that recovery-focused language increased following the introduction of the HAO, though this was not maintained at follow-up. This pattern was not supported by statistical analyses. No clear pattern of change was found for non-recovery-focused language.
Conclusion:
The introduction of a brief measure of recovery may have influenced staff attitudes and behaviours temporarily. Any longer term impact is likely to depend on ongoing commitment to the use of the measure, without which staff language, attitudes and behaviours return to previous levels.
Bowen, Amber L.
b1166117-2849-454c-be12-402c0c8eb28f
Maguire, Tessa
f720bf11-2227-470f-b9bf-b323a59e176c
Newman-Taylor, Katherine
e090b9da-6ede-45d5-8a56-2e86c2dafef7
Bowen, Amber L.
b1166117-2849-454c-be12-402c0c8eb28f
Maguire, Tessa
f720bf11-2227-470f-b9bf-b323a59e176c
Newman-Taylor, Katherine
e090b9da-6ede-45d5-8a56-2e86c2dafef7
Bowen, Amber L., Maguire, Tessa and Newman-Taylor, Katherine
(2019)
Do recovery outcome measures improve clinical practice? A linguistic analysis of the impact of the Hope, Agency and Opportunity measure in community mental health teams.
Perspectives in Public Health.
(doi:10.1177/1757913919852121).
Abstract
Aims:
Recovery approaches are identified as the overarching framework for improving mental health services for people with severe and enduring conditions. These approaches prioritise living well with long-term conditions, as evidenced by personal recovery outcomes. There is little research demonstrating how to support busy mental health teams, work in this way. This study assessed the impact of introducing a brief measure of recovery, the Hope, Agency and Opportunity (HAO), on the attitudes and behaviours of staff working in community mental health teams, to test whether routine use of such measures facilitates recovery-based practice.
Methods:
Linguistic analysis assumes that language is indicative of wider attitudes and behaviours. Anonymised clinical notes recorded by community mental health team clinicians were analysed for recovery and non-recovery language, over 30 months. This covered periods before, during and after the introduction of the recovery measure. We used a single-case design (N = 1 community mental health team) and hypothesised that clinicians would use recovery-focused language more frequently, and non-recovery-focused language less frequently, following the introduction of the measure, and that these changes would be maintained at 18-month follow-up.
Results:
Visual inspection of the data indicated that recovery-focused language increased following the introduction of the HAO, though this was not maintained at follow-up. This pattern was not supported by statistical analyses. No clear pattern of change was found for non-recovery-focused language.
Conclusion:
The introduction of a brief measure of recovery may have influenced staff attitudes and behaviours temporarily. Any longer term impact is likely to depend on ongoing commitment to the use of the measure, without which staff language, attitudes and behaviours return to previous levels.
Text
Impact of recovery outcomes - for submission to Perspectives in Public Health - accepted manuscript
- Accepted Manuscript
Text
Do recovery measures improve clinical practice
- Version of Record
Restricted to Repository staff only
Request a copy
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 23 July 2019
e-pub ahead of print date: 23 July 2019
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 433485
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/433485
ISSN: 1757-9147
PURE UUID: 42428ca8-bcfc-4908-bd06-1a291e1dc26f
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 23 Aug 2019 16:30
Last modified: 16 Mar 2024 04:42
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Amber L. Bowen
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics