"The Best of Both Worlds": Experiences of young people attending groups co-facilitated by peer workers and clinicians in a youth mental health service.

AIM: Groups facilitated by peer workers have been shown to be effective in improving recovery-related outcomes in adult populations. However, limited research has explored the involvement of peer workers in groups in youth mental health services. This qualitative study aimed to explore young people's experiences of participating in groups co-facilitated by youth peer workers and clinicians. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 young people aged 15-25 years who had attended groups conducted in-person and online at a tertiary youth mental health service. Young people were receiving individual support through the service for a range of mental health concerns. Groups were conducted by two clinicians and a youth peer worker who had used the same service and had undergone training in Intentional Peer Support®. An inductive approach using open, process, in vivo and pattern coding was used to identify key themes. Concept mapping was used to explore the relationships between them. RESULTS: Nine overarching themes were identified that highlighted the unique and complementary contributions of youth peer worker and clinician roles. The sharing of lived experience by youth peer workers facilitated young people's engagement in group discussions, hope for the future, and sense of belonging, whereas clinical input created a sense of safety, structure and purpose. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the value of a co-facilitation model in improving the engagement and recovery outcomes for young people experiencing mental health challenges.

Shared Decision Making With Young People at Ultra High Risk of Psychotic Disorder.

Introduction: While the majority of young people who meet the criteria for being considered at increased risk of psychosis do not go on to develop a psychotic disorder, young people are currently being identified and treated in early intervention services. Ethical concerns have been raised concerning the decision about whether or not to provide treatment, and if so, what type of treatment. This study sought to support young people themselves to make these decisions with support from their clinician through a shared decision-making approach, facilitated by an online decision aid. Methods: This project used the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) to guide the development and piloting of an online decision aid across two phases: (1) qualitative, semi-structured focus groups with young people who were past clients and clinicians from an early psychosis service; and (2) pilot testing of the decision aid with clinicians and young people who were current clients to finalize the development. Results: Issues discussed by clinicians in the focus group were grouped into three main areas: (1) engagement phase; (2) assessment and priorities for treatment; and (3) initial and ongoing decision making. Clients focused on the context in which the decisions were made, including as they experienced initial feelings of resistance, and then acceptance of efforts made to describe and treat their mental health challenges. Clients highlighted the need for collaboration between themselves and their clinician, and the need to be equipped with the knowledge and tools to take care of themselves. These focus group data were used to refine the online decision aid. Pilot testing revealed that while it was overall useful and relevant, important limitations were noted by both clients and clinicians. Discussion: The use of a decision aid to facilitate shared decision making (SDM) in this area is feasible and has utility for both clients and clinicians. Use of such a tool can help to address the need to uphold the rights of young people as decision makers about their own care. Future efforts should embed decision aids within complex SDM interventions, and research to understand issues relating to implementation of these interventions.

A Systematic Review of the Attributes and Outcomes of Peer Work and Guidelines for Reporting Studies of Peer Interventions.

A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE ATTRIBUTES AND OUTCOMES OF PEER WORK.

Three Nontraditional Approaches to Improving the Capacity, Accessibility, and Quality of Mental Health Services: An Overview.

To provide evidence for wider use of peer workers and other nonprofessionals, the authors examined three approaches to mental health service provision-peer support worker (PSW) programs, task shifting, and mental health first-aid and community advocacy organizations-summarizing their effectiveness, identifying similarities and differences, and highlighting opportunities for integration. Relevant articles obtained from PubMed, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar searches are discussed. Studies indicate that PSWs can achieve outcomes equal to or better than those achieved by nonpeer mental health professionals. PSWs can be particularly effective in reducing hospital admissions and inpatient days and engaging severely ill patients. When certain care tasks are given to individuals with less training than professionals (task shifting), these staff members can provide psychoeducation, engage service users in treatment, and help them achieve symptom reduction and manage risk of relapse. Mental health first-aid and community organizations can reduce stigma, increase awareness of mental health issues, and encourage help seeking. Most PSW programs have reported implementation challenges, whereas such challenges are fewer in task-shifting programs and minimal in mental health first-aid. Despite challenges in scaling and integrating these approaches into larger systems, they hold promise for improving access to and quality of care. Research is needed on how these approaches can be combined to expand a community's capacity to provide care. Because of the serious shortage of mental health providers globally and the rising prevalence of mental illness, utilizing nontraditional providers may be the only solution in both low- and high-resource settings, at least in the short term.

The Choice Project: Peer Workers Promoting Shared Decision Making at a Youth Mental Health Service.

OBJECTIVE: In youth mental health services, consumer participation is essential, but few implementation strategies exist to engage young consumers. This project evaluated an intervention implemented in an Australian youth mental health service that utilized peer workers to promote shared decision making via an online tool. METHODS: All new clients ages 16-25 were invited to participate in this nonrandomized comparative study, which used a historical comparison group (N=80). Intervention participants (N=149) engaged with a peer worker and used the online tool before and during their intake assessment. Pre- and postintake data were collected for both groups; measures included decisional conflict, perceived shared decision making, and satisfaction. A series of paired t tests, analyses of variance, and multiple regressions were conducted to assess differences in scores across intervention and comparison groups and pre- and postintake assessments. RESULTS: Ratings of perceived shared decision making with intake workers were higher in the intervention group than in the comparison group (p=.015). In both groups, decisional conflict scores were significantly lower after the intake assessment (p<.001 for both groups). Both perceived shared decision making and lower decisional conflict were associated with satisfaction (p<.015). CONCLUSIONS: Young people who participated in an intervention that combined peer work and shared decision making reported feeling more involved in their assessment. Feeling involved and having lower decisional conflict after seeing an intake worker were important for client satisfaction. These findings demonstrate the importance of both peer work and shared decision making for promoting optimal outcomes in youth mental health services.