Literature DB >> 18624782

Mental health care: trust and mistrust in different caring contexts.

Jukka Piippo1, Jukka Aaltonen.   

Abstract

AIMS AND
OBJECTIVES: To identify the factors that make trust within the context of public mental health possible. We also consider the question of patients' trust in the whole caring system. The study is based on individual interviews with 22 psychiatric patients, who were also users of social services.
BACKGROUND: There are theoretical studies concerning trust between human beings in several disciplines within psychiatry and social services but few studies investigate how trust can be created and what makes it possible. The literature reveals that there is need for research concerning trust in psychiatry. In this study we examined two different caring contexts and investigated what makes trust possible in these contexts. The contexts are termed the Integrated Network and Family Model and the Traditional Model.
DESIGN: A qualitative method based on the grounded theory approach was used.
METHODS: The main focus in the analysis was on how the patients had experienced the contexts of the caring systems and how trust was created or not within them.
RESULTS: Three categories creating trust were found in the Integrated Network and Family Model and two in the Traditional context. Acceptance of the patient's expertise concerning his/her life situation, openness and joint discussions concerning knowledge are important. Trust is closely connected to autonomy and power: patients feel that trust increases as their experience of autonomy increases and in such situations power is not owned by any one person.
CONCLUSIONS: Trust between psychiatric patients and personnel can be created in both the Integrated Network and Family Model and traditional context, but in different ways. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Clinical workers and nursing personnel can use our findings in their practical work with psychiatric patients. Our findings support theoretical considerations concerning trust and can be used as guidelines for nursing personnel in their work.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18624782     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2007.02270.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Nurs        ISSN: 0962-1067            Impact factor:   3.036


  5 in total

1.  Shared Reflection to Maximize Resources and Minimize Costs: The Reflecting Team Applied to a Hospital Environment.

Authors:  M M Balcells-Oliveró; L Nuño; N Freixa; I Domínguez; I Pons; E Alcover; T Gual
Journal:  Community Ment Health J       Date:  2020-09-29

2.  Open dialogue in the UK: qualitative study.

Authors:  Rachel H Tribe; Abigail M Freeman; Steven Livingstone; Joshua C H Stott; Stephen Pilling
Journal:  BJPsych Open       Date:  2019-07

3.  Measuring Patient Trust in Public versus Private Physicians in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA).

Authors:  Afnan Aljaffary; Arwa AlThumairi; Lojain Almarhoon; Ghalyah Alsaawi
Journal:  J Multidiscip Healthc       Date:  2021-01-26

Review 4.  Systematic synthesis of barriers and facilitators to service user-led care planning.

Authors:  Penny Bee; Owen Price; John Baker; Karina Lovell
Journal:  Br J Psychiatry       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 9.319

5.  Developing Interpersonal Trust Between Service Users and Professionals in Integrated Services: Compensating for Latent Distrust, Vulnerabilities and Uncertainty Shaped by Organisational Context.

Authors:  Rie Mandrup Poulsen; Kathrine Hoffmann Pii; Lene Falgaard Eplov; Mathias Meijer; Ute Bültmann; Ulla Christensen
Journal:  Int J Integr Care       Date:  2021-07-01       Impact factor: 5.120

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.