Introducing Compassionate and Relational Enquiry (CARE): A Three-Day Training for Mental Health Clinicians on Relational Ways of Working.

Research shows that, in mental healthcare, empathy and active listening skills play a fundamental role in the therapeutic relationship. Despite this, clinicians receive little training in cultivating these qualities, and there is a dearth of training in therapeutic relationships and relational care in this field more generally. In response to this paucity of training, a new intensive three-day training programme has been developed called Compassionate and Relational Enquiry (CARE). The CARE training programme has recently been delivered to a number of mental health teams in different boroughs of an NHS Trust and has undergone several rounds of redevelopment. This paper outlines the CARE training programme's objectives and mode of delivery, and subsequently presents questionnaire results from recent CARE trainees regarding their experience of the nature and utility of the training. Four main themes emerged from responses to the question of the utility of the training, these were 'A shift towards more person-centred care', 'Strengthens the therapeutic relationship', 'Facilitates more collaborative care with patients and their families' and 'Development of new skills and therapeutic techniques'. The paper concludes by discussing the potential of this training to help forge a substantial shift in the culture of mental health services in a systemic way.

Peer-supported Open Dialogue: a thematic analysis of trainee perspectives on the approach and training.

BACKGROUND: Open Dialogue (OD) is a Finnish social network based model of care, with practice and organisational aspects. Peer-supported Open Dialogue (POD) is a UK version involving peer workers, whose contributions include building on fragmented social networks. Fifty-four NHS staff undertook the first training in POD between 2014 and 2015. The training course was organised as four separate residential weeks, together with reflective sharing on an online platform. AIMS: This study aimed to explore the perspectives of the POD trainees on the training and the POD approach. METHODS: At the end of the training year, four focus groups were conducted using a semi-structured interview measure examining trainees' perspectives on the training and POD approach. A thematic analysis was performed on the transcripts to analyse data. RESULTS: Four superordinate themes emerged: personal experience, practice development, principles of POD, and pedagogical issues, each with a variety of subordinate themes. CONCLUSIONS: The course was widely reported as a positive experience, with substantial changes in attitudes and approaches to clinical work arising thus. Across the four superordinate themes, participant responses described a highly experiential course, experienced as an emotional journey which enabled them to embody the principles of POD, as well as use them at work.

Open Dialogue and its Relevance to the NHS: Opinions of NHS Staff and Service Users.

Open Dialogue is a model of mental health services that originated in Finland and has since, been taken up in trial teams worldwide. As this is a relatively unknown approach in the UK, it is important to tentatively explore perspectives of NHS staff and service-users. Sixty-one Open Dialogue conference attendees, both staff and service-users, were recruited for this study. A feedback questionnaire was administered to determine the extent to which they believed the key tenets of Open Dialogue were important to service user care, and the extent to which they existed within current NHS services. Analysis of data demonstrated a strong consensus on the importance of the key principles of Open Dialogue for mental health care and also moderate disagreement that these principles exist within current NHS service provision. The Open Dialogue principles may offer a useful framework in order to develop services in a clinically meaningful way.

The community mental health team fidelity scale: A measure of program fidelity of social networks interventions for severe mental illness.

Open dialogue (OD) is a multi-component therapeutic and organizational intervention for crisis and continuing community mental health care with a therapeutic focus on clients' social networks. The development and implementation of this model of care in the United Kingdom requires considerable contextual adaptations which need to be assessed to support effective implementation. Program fidelity-the extent to which core components of an intervention are delivered as intended by an intervention protocol at all levels-is crucial for these adaptations. Aims: To develop, pilot, and implement a program fidelity measure for community mental health services providing OD and 'treatment as usual' (TAU) or standard NHS crisis and community care. Methods: Measure structure, content, and scoring were developed and refined through an iterative process of discussion between the research team and OD experts. Measure was piloted in the 6 OD and 6 TAU services participating in a large-scale research program. Results: Initial data suggests that the Community Mental Health Team Fidelity Scale (COM-FIDE) is a potentially reliable and feasible measure of the fidelity of community mental health services and specific OD components of such services.

Exploring patients' experience of peer-supported open dialogue and standard care following a mental health crisis: qualitative 3-month follow-up study.

BACKGROUND: Experience of crisis care may vary across different care models. AIMS: To explore the experience of care in standard care and 'open dialogue' (a peer-supported community service focused on open dialogue and involving social networks for adults with a recent mental health crisis) 3 months after a crisis. METHOD: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 11 participants (6 received open dialogue; 5 received treatment as usual (TAU)) in a feasibility study of open dialogue and analysed the data using a three-step inductive thematic analysis to identify themes that (a) were frequently endorsed and (b) represented the experiences of all participants. RESULTS: Four themes emerged: (a) feeling able to rely on and access mental health services; (b) supportive and understanding family and friends; (c) having a choice and a voice; and (d) confusion and making sense of experiences. Generally, there was a divergence in experience across the two care models. Open dialogue participants often felt able to rely on and access services and involve their family and friends in their care. TAU participants described a need to rely on services and difficulty when it was not met, needing family and friends for support and wanting them to be more involved in their care. Some participants across both care models experienced confusion after a crisis and described benefits of sense-making. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding crisis care experiences across different care models can inform service development in crisis and continuing mental healthcare services.

Open Dialogue compared to treatment as usual for adults experiencing a mental health crisis: Protocol for the ODDESSI multi-site cluster randomised controlled trial.

Background 'Open Dialogue' is a social network model of crisis and continuing mental healthcare which involves elements of service delivery such as immediate response and a style of therapeutic meeting called network meetings. Although there are indications from non-randomised studies that it may help people in their recovery from severe mental health crises and improve long-term outcomes, this has yet to be tested in a randomised controlled trial. Methods This paper outlines the protocol for a multi-site cluster-randomised control trial assessing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of Open Dialogue compared to treatment as usual (TAU) for individuals presenting in crisis to six mental health services in England. The primary outcome is time to relapse, with secondary outcomes including measures of recovery and service use. Participants will be followed-up for two years, with data collected from electronic medical records and researcher-led interviews. The analysis will compare outcomes between treatment groups as well as investigating potential mediators of effect: shared decision-making and social network quality and size. Carers of a subsample of participants will be asked about their experiences of shared decision-making, carer burden, and satisfaction. Discussion This trial will provide evidence of whether Open Dialogue services implemented in the English mental health system is an effective alternative to current care and may have important implications for the organization of community mental health services. Trial registration: retrospectively registered (108 participants recruited of 570 target) on 20/12/2019, ISRCTN52653325.

Development and refinement of the open dialog adherence protocol in complex mental health care.

Introduction: Open dialog (OD) is a both a therapeutic practice and a service delivery model that offers an integrated response to mental health care through mobilizing resources within the service user's family and community networks through joint network meetings. Therapist adherence is a crucial to the effective delivery of interventions. A key way to measure this is through structured observation tools. Aims: The aim of this research project is to develop and refine the Dialogic Practice Adherence Scale, for use in OD research trials in the United Kingdom. Methods: This study was a mixed methods approach to the development of an OD practitioner adherence measure. Initial steps involved meetings and discussions with experts and a review of the literature. Content validation studies were completed using a modified Delphi technique. To assess reliability of the measure, OD network meetings were audio-recorded, and tapes were rated by two independent researchers. Inter-rater reliability and internal consistency were assessed through quantitative approaches assessing variance. Results: Results provide a description of how the OD Adherence Manual was developed in collaboration. Validation surveys showed high levels on consensus among experts in the field on the key elements of OD network meetings. Inter-rater reliability for the total score was excellent and internal consistency analyses suggest the scale is highly reliable. Discussion: The scale presented here is an initial attempt at rating practitioner adherence in OD network meetings. It provides encouraging evidence that this can be done with strong validity and reliability and can be completed by a range of raters with varying levels of clinical experience.