Evaluating the feasibility and potential impacts of a recovery-oriented psychosocial rehabilitation toolkit in a health care setting in Kenya: A mixed-methods study.

OBJECTIVES: This pilot study evaluated the feasibility and potential impacts of delivering the Psychosocial Rehabilitation (PSR) Toolkit for people with serious mental illness within a health care setting in Kenya. METHOD: This study used a convergent mixed-methods design. Participants were people with serious mental illness (n = 23), each with an accompanying family member, who were outpatients of a hospital or satellite clinic in semirural Kenya. The intervention consisted of 14 weekly group sessions of PSR cofacilitated by health care professionals and peers with mental illness. Quantitative data were collected from patients and family members using validated outcome measures before and after the intervention. Qualitative data were collected from focus groups with patients and family members, and individual interviews with facilitators, after the intervention. RESULTS: Quantitative findings indicated that patients experienced moderate improvement in illness management and, in contrast to qualitative findings, family members experienced moderate worsening in attitudes toward recovery. Qualitative findings revealed positive outcomes for both patients and family members, as reflected in greater feelings of hope and mobilization to reduce stigma. Factors that facilitated participation included: helpful and accessible learning materials; committed and involved stakeholders; and flexible solutions to promote continued involvement. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This pilot study found that delivery of the Psychosocial Rehabilitation Toolkit was feasible within a health care setting in Kenya and associated with overall positive outcomes among patients with serious mental illness. Further research on its effectiveness on a larger scale and using culturally validated measures is needed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

The impacts of implementing recovery innovations: a conceptual framework grounded in qualitative research.

BACKGROUND: Implementing mental health recovery into services is a policy priority in Canada and globally. To that end, a 5 year study was undertaken with seven organisations providing mental health and housing services to people living with a mental health challenge to implement guidelines for the transformation of services and systems towards a recovery-orientation. Multi-stakeholder implementation teams were established and a facilitated process guided teams to choosing and planning for the implementation of one recovery innovation. The recovery innovations chosen were hiring peer support workers, Wellness Recovery Action Planning (WRAP), a family support group, and staff recovery training. METHODS: This study reports on data collected at the post-implementation stage. 90 service users, service providers, family members, managers, other actors and knowledge users participated in 41 group, individual or dyad semi-structured interviews. The interview guides included open-ended questions eliciting participants' impressions regarding the impact of implementing the innovation on service users, service providers and organisations. We applied a collaborative qualitative content analysis approach in NVivo12 to coding and interpreting the data generated from these questions. RESULTS: Eighteen impacts of implementing recovery innovations from the perspectives of diverse stakeholder groups were identified. Three impacts of working as an implementation team member and as part of a research project were also identified. Impacts were developed into a conceptual framework organised around four overall categories of impact: Ways of being, Ways of interacting, Ways of thinking, and Ways of operating and doing business. CONCLUSIONS: The IMpacts of Recovery Innovations (IMRI) framework version 1 can assist researchers, evaluators and decision-makers identify, explore and understand impact in the context of recovery innovations. The framework helps fill a gap in conceptualising service and organisation-level impacts. Future research is needed to validate the framework and map it to existing methods for studying impact.

Translating mental health recovery guidelines into recovery-oriented innovations: A strategy combining implementation teams and a facilitated planning process.

Recovery is the focus of mental health strategies internationally. However, little translation of recovery knowledge has occurred in mental health services. The purpose of this research is to bridge the gap between recovery guidelines and practice by developing a new implementation strategy involving the formation of implementation teams made up of different stakeholders (service users, service providers, managers, knowledge users) and facilitating a 12-meeting implementation planning process. Sevenmental health organizations across Canada successfully completed the process of translating the guidelines into a recovery-oriented innovation that was implemented. Fifty-five implementation team members were interviewed upon completion of the 12-meeting process. Findings indicate that implementation team members perceived the structured planning process as positive. Nevertheless, the language of implementation science remains difficult to understand for a non-academic audience. Key elements of the 12-meeting process included the value of consensus building among implementation team members and the subsequent shifting power relationships. While working with diverse stakeholders came with certain challenges, the process in itself was a form of system transformation. This type of engaged planning process was a significant departure from the more top-down approaches to organizational change that staff were used to.

Heeding the Call of an Innovative Paradigm for Mental Health Interventions in Low- and Middle-income Countries.

The provision of mental health care for people living in low- and middle-income countries presents a particularly complex problem because of fractured service availability and provision, widespread stigma associated with mental illness, and the economic burden inherent in conventional mental health service delivery. People with serious mental illness in these settings are among the most marginalized in their societies and are at risk of becoming increasingly powerless in the face of top-down, service-oriented systems. Innovative intersectoral approaches that are based on asset development and entrepreneurism and that embrace the power of peer-driven networks hold promise to effect transformative and meaningful change.

Identifying and understanding the contextual factors that shaped mid-implementation outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic in organizations implementing mental health recovery innovations into services.

BACKGROUND: Seven housing and health services organizations were guided through a process of translating Chapter Six of the Canadian Guidelines for Recovery-Oriented Practice into a recovery-oriented innovation and plan for its implementation. At the time of the COVID-19 outbreak and lockdown measures, six of the seven organizations had begun implementing their chosen innovation (peer workers, wellness recovery action planning facilitator training, staff training and a family support group). This mid-implementation study used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to identify contextual factors that influenced organizations to continue or postpone implementation of recovery-oriented innovations in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Twenty-seven semi-structured 45-min interviews were conducted between May and June 2020 (21 implementation team members and six providers of the innovation (trainers, facilitators, peer workers). Interview guides and analysis were based on the CFIR. Content analysis combined deductive and inductive approaches. Summaries of coded data were given ratings based on strength and valence of the construct's impact on implementation. Ratings were visualized by mid-implementation outcome and recovery innovation to identify constructs which appear to distinguish between sites with a more or less favorable mid-implementation outcomes. RESULTS: Four mid-implementation outcomes were observed at this snapshot in time (from most to least positive): continued implementation with adaptation (one site), postponement with adaptation and estimated relaunch date (four sites), indefinite postponement with no decision on relaunch date (one site), and no implementation of innovation yet (one site). Two constructs had either a negative influence (external policies and incentives-renamed COVID-19-related external policy for this study) or a positive influence (leadership engagement), regardless of implementation outcome. Four factors appeared to distinguish between more or less positive mid-implementation outcome: adaptability, implementation climate and relative priority, available resources, and formally appointed internal implementation leaders (renamed "engaging implementation teams during the COVID-19 pandemic" for this study). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented outer setting factor. Studies that use the CFIR at the mid-implementation stage are rare, as are studies focusing on the outer setting. Through robust qualitative analysis, we identify the key factors that shaped the course of implementation of recovery innovations over this turbulent time.

The CFIR Card Game: a new approach for working with implementation teams to identify challenges and strategies.

BACKGROUND: The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and the ERIC compilation of implementation strategies are key resources for identifying implementation barriers and strategies. However, their respective density and complexity make their application to implementation planning outside of academia challenging. We developed the CFIR Card Game as a way of working with multi-stakeholder implementation teams that were implementing mental health recovery into their services, to identify barriers and strategies to overcome them. The aim of this descriptive evaluation is to describe how the game was prepared, played, used and received by teams and researchers and their perception of the clarity of the CFIR constructs. METHODS: We used the new CFIR-ERIC Matching Tool v.1 to design the game. We produced a deck of cards with each of the CFIR-ERIC Matching Tool barrier narratives representing all 39 CFIR constructs. Teams played the game at the pre-implementation stage at a time when they were actively engaged in a planning process for implementing their selected recovery-oriented innovation. The teams placed each card in either the YES or NO column of the board in response to whether they anticipated experiencing this barrier in their setting. Teams were also asked about the clarity of the barrier narratives and were provided with plain language versions if unclear. Researchers completed a reflection form following the game, and participants completed an open-added questionnaire that included questions specific to the CFIR Card Game. We applied a descriptive coding approach to analysis. RESULTS: Four descriptive themes emerged from this analysis: (1) the CFIR Card Game as a useful and engaging process, (2) difficulties understanding CFIR construct barrier narratives, (3) strengths of the game's design and structure and room for improvement and (4) mediating factors: facilitator preparation and multi-stakeholder dynamics. Quantitative findings regarding the clarity of the barrier narratives were integrated with qualitative data under theme 2. Only seven of the 39 original barrier narratives were judged to be clear by all teams. CONCLUSIONS: The CFIR Card Game can be used to enhance implementation planning. Plain language versions of CFIR construct barrier narratives are needed. Our plain language versions require further testing and refining.