Gegenseitige Unterstützung Psychiatrieerfahrener in Krisenunterkünften – ein Scoping Review

Zusammenfassung

Ziel Als Alternative zur psychiatrischen Versorgung gibt es v. a. im angloamerikanischen Raum sogenannte Crisis Respites (CR), in denen sich krisen- und genesungserfahrene Menschen (Peers) gegenseitig unterstützen. In dieser Arbeit wird untersucht, wie CR aufgebaut sind und mit welchen Ansätzen und Ergebnissen sie evaluiert werden.

Methodik Systematische Literaturrecherche. Studien wurden eingeschlossen, auch der „grauen“ Literatur, sofern sie empirisches Material enthielten.

Ergebnisse Auswahl von 12 Publikationen mit Bezug zu insgesamt 10 CR. Die Arbeits- und Organisationsformen von CR sind sehr heterogen. Es wurden unterschiedliche Evaluationsansätze (RCT, qualitativ, Mixed-Methods) genutzt.

Schlussfolgerung CR sind kein Ersatz für die psychiatrische Versorgung, sondern eine eigene, wirksame Unterstützungsform. Der Einfluss von Peers bei der Umsetzung und Evaluation ist von zentraler Bedeutung, damit ihre Eigenheiten erhalten bleiben.

Abstract

Objective In various places around the world, crises respites (CR) are being implemented as an alternative to psychiatric treatment, and to offer mutual, short-term residential support by people with lived experience. In this paper, it is examined, how CR are structured, and how – using which approaches and leading to which results – they have been evaluated.

Methods A systematic scoping review of the international literature was carried out. Studies were included, also from the “grey” literature, if they were based on empirical material.

Results 12 articles, relating to 10 CR, were selected. The organisational structures of the included CR were found to be quite heterogeneous. Further, different approaches were used for evaluation (RCT, qualitative, mixed methods).

Conclusion CR are no substitute for psychiatric care, but a distinct, effective form of support. The influence of people with lived experience is crucial to the implementation and evaluation of CR to preserve their distinctiveness.

Schlüsselwörter

Krisenunterkunft - Peer-Begleitung - Selbsthilfe - Psychiatriekritik - Scoping Review - Systemveränderung

Keywords

peer respite - peer support - peer-run - critical psychiatry - scoping review - system transformation

• Literatur

• 1 United Nations. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Im Internet: https://www.un.org/disabilities/documents/convention/convention_accessible_pdf.pdf
• 2 Davidson L, Chinman M, Kloos B. et al. Peer Support Among Individuals With Severe Mental Illness: A Review of the Evidence. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice 1999; 6: 165-187
• 3 Ostrow L, Croft B. Results from the 2016 Peer Respite Essential Features Survey. 2016. Im Internet: https://power2u.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/PREF-Report-05.05.16.pdf
• 4 Greenfield TK, Stoneking BC, Humphreys K. et al. A Randomized Trial of a Mental Health Consumer-Managed Alternative to Civil Commitment for Acute Psychiatric Crisis. Am J Community Psychol 2008; 42: 135-144
• 5 Dumont J, Jones K. Findings from a Consumer/Survivor Defined Alternative to Psychiatric Hospitalization. Outlook (Practice, Evaluation, Research) 2002; 4-6
• 6 Bouchery EE, Barna M, Babalola E. et al. The Effectiveness of a Peer-Staffed Crisis Respite Program as an Alternative to Hospitalization. Psychiatr Serv 2018; 69: 1069-1074
• 7 National Empowerment Center. NEC’s FAQ for RFI by DMH. Lawrence, MA: National Empowerment Center; 2009
• 8 Jones N, Teague GB, Wolf J. et al. Organizational Climate and Support Among Peer Specialists Working in Peer-Run, Hybrid and Conventional Mental Health Settings. Adm Policy Ment Health 2020; 47: 150-167
• 9 Ostrow L, Fisher D. Peer-Run Crisis Respites. A review of the model and opportunities for future developments in research and innovation. 2011. Im Internet: https://www.power2u.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Ostrow-Fisher-PRCR-12.20.2011.pdf
• 10 Fletcher E, Barroso A. Organizational dynamics at a peer respite: A focused ethnography of an emergent strategy. Soc Work Ment Health 2019; 17: 1-24
• 11 Penney D, Prescott L. The co-optation of survivor knowledge: The danger of substituted values and voice. In: Searching for a rose garden: Challenging psychiatry, fostering mad studies. Ross-on-Wye, England: PCCS Books; 2016: 35-45
• 12 Chamberlin J. On our own: Patient-controlled alternatives to the mental health system. New York, NY, US: McGraw-Hill; 1978
• 13 McLean AH. From Ex-Patient Alternatives to Consumer Options: Consequences of Consumerism for Psychiatric Consumers and the Ex-Patient Movement. International Journal of Health Services; 2010. Im Internet: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.2190/3TYX-VRRK-XKHA-VB1Q
• 14 Penny D. Defining “Peer Support”: Implications for Policy, Practice, and Research. Im Internet: https://www.ahpnet.com/AHPNet/media/AHPNetMediaLibrary/White%20Papers/DPenney_Defining_peer_support_2018_Final.pdf
• 15 Munn Z, Peters MDJ, Stern C. et al. Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Med Res Methodol 2018; 18: 143
• 16 Dijkers M. What is a Scoping Review?. KT Update 2015; 4: 5 Im Internet: https://ktdrr.org/products/update/v4n1/dijkers_ktupdate_v4n1_12-15.pdf
• 17 Armstrong R, Hall BJ, Doyle J. et al. ‘Scoping the scope’ of a cochrane review. J Public Health (Oxf) 2011; 33: 147-150
• 18 Colquhoun HL, Levac D, O’Brien KK. et al. Scoping reviews: time for clarity in definition, methods, and reporting. J Clin Epidemiol 2014; 67: 1291-1294
• 19 NCMHR. Mental Health Peer-Operated Crisis Respite Programs. Washington, D.C.: National Coalition for Mental Health Recovery, formerly the National Coalition of Mental Health Consumer/Survivor Organizations; 2008
• 20 New York City Department of Health. Parachute NYC: Tracing the Origins, Development, and Implementation of an Innovative Alternative to Psychiatric Crisis. 2015
• 21 Hopper K, Van Tiem J, Cubellis L. et al. Merging Intentional Peer Support and Dialogic Practice: Implementation Lessons From Parachute NYC. PS 2019;
• 22 Croft B, İsvan N. Impact of the 2nd Story Peer Respite Program on Use of Inpatient and Emergency Services. Psychiatr Serv 2015; 66: 632-637
• 23 Fletcher E, Barroso A, Croft B. A Case Study of a Peer Respite’s Integration into a Public Mental Health System. J Health Care Poor Underserved 2020; 31: 218-234
• 24 Copeland ME. Wellness Recovery Action Plan. Occup Ther Ment Health 2002; 17: 127-150
• 25 Shattell MM, Harris B, Beavers J. et al. A recovery-oriented alternative to hospital emergency departments for persons in emotional distress: „the living room“. Issues Ment Health Nurs 2014; 35: 4-12
• 26 Siantz E, Henwood B, McGovern N. et al. Peer Respites: A Qualitative Assessment of Consumer Experience. Adm Policy Ment Health 2018; 1-8
• 27 Heyland M, Johnson M. Evaluating an Alternative to the Emergency Department for Adults in Mental Health Crisis. Issues Ment Health Nurs 2017; 38: 557-561
• 28 Bologna MJ, Pulice RT. Evaluation of a Peer-Run Hospital Diversion Program: A Descriptive Study. Am J Psychiatr Rehabil 2011; 14: 272-286
• 29 Miccio S. Hospital Diversion Services – A Manual on Assisting in the Development of a Respite/Diversion Service in Your Area. Poughkeepsie, NY: PEOPLe Inc; 2011
• 30 Grant J, Westhues A. Mental Health Crisis/Respite Service: A Process Evaluation. Soc Work Ment Health 2012; 10: 34-52
• 31 Burns-Lynch B, Salzer MS. Adopting Innovations – Lessons Learned from a Peer-Based Hospital Diversion Program. Community Ment Health J 2001; 37: 511-521
• 32 Siantz E, Ostrow L. Attitudes of Mental Health Peer-Run Organizations Towards Health Homes: Recommendations for Policy and Practice. Community Ment Health J 2019; 55: 420-427
• 33 Schwarz J, Galbusera L, Bechdolf A. et al. Changes in German Mental Health Care by Implementing a Global Treatment Budget – A Mixed-Method Process Evaluation Study. Front Psychiatry; 2020 11. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00426/full
• 34 Ostrow L, Steinwachs D, Leaf PJ. et al. Medicaid Reimbursement of Mental Health Peer-Run Organizations: Results of a National Survey. Adm Policy Ment Health 2017; 44: 501-511
• 35 Ostrow L, Leaf PJ. Improving Capacity to Monitor and Support Sustainability of Mental Health Peer-Run Organizations. Psychiatr Serv 2014; 65: 239-241
• 36 Ostrow L, Hayes SL. Leadership and characteristics of nonprofit mental health peer-run organizations nationwide. Psychiatr Serv 2015; 66: 421-425
• 37 Gillard S, Gibson SL, Holley J. et al. Developing a change model for peer worker interventions in mental health services: a qualitative research study. Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci 2015; 24: 435-445
• 38 Lloyd-Evans B, Mayo-Wilson E, Harrison B. et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of peer support for people with severe mental illness. BMC Psychiatry 2014; 14: 39
• 39 Ostrow L, Croft B. Peer Respites: A Research and Practice Agenda. Psychiatr Serv 2015; 66: 638-640
• 40 Ostrow L, Croft B. Basic Characteristics of Peer Respites. 2014. Im Internet: https://www.livelearninc.net/s/Peer-Respite-Characteristics-Final.pdf
• 41 von Peter S. Partizipative und kollaborative Forschungsansätze in der Psychiatrie. Psychiat Prax 2017; 44: 431-433
• 42 Rose D, Thornicroft G, Slade M. Who decides what evidence is? Developing a multiple perspectives paradigm in mental health. Acta Psychiatr Scand Suppl 2006; 109-114
• 43 Ostrow L, Croft B. Toolkit for Evaluating Peer Respites. 2014. Im Internet: https://www.power2u.org/downloads/Peer-Respite-Toolkit.pdf
• 44 Ostrow L, Croft B. Guidebook for Peer Respite Self-Evaluation: Practical Steps and Tools. 2017. Im Internet: http://www.peerrespite.net/s/2017-Guidebook-for-Peer-Respite-Self-Evaluation.pdf