Literature DB >> 33676456

Loneliness in early psychosis: a qualitative study exploring the views of mental health practitioners in early intervention services.

Theodora Stefanidou1, Jingyi Wang2, Nicola Morant3, Brynmor Lloyd-Evans3, Sonia Johnson3,4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Loneliness is an important public health problem with established adverse effects on physical and mental health. Although people with psychosis often experience high levels of loneliness, relatively little is known about the relationship between loneliness and early psychosis. Potential interventions to address loneliness might be easier to implement early in the illness when social networks and social skills may be more intact than at a later stage. We investigated the views of mental health practitioners about the context and causes of loneliness in people with early psychosis, and about potential interventions.
METHODS: Semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted with mental health practitioners (n = 20). Participants were purposively recruited from four early intervention services for first-episode psychosis in the UK. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematic analysis was conducted.
RESULTS: Participants believed that the majority of service users with early psychosis experience feelings of loneliness. They often saw socially isolated and disconnected clients and believed them to be lonely, but rarely discussed loneliness explicitly in clinical interactions. A combination of symptoms, stigma and negative sense of self were believed to underpin loneliness. Participants could not identify any specific current interventions delivered by their services for tackling loneliness, but thought some routinely provided interventions, including social groups and psychological treatments, could be helpful. They favoured making a wider range of loneliness interventions available and believed that community agencies beyond mental health services should be involved to make these effective and feasible to deliver. They suggested social participation interventions without an explicit mental health focus as potentially promising and valued a co-produced approach to intervention development.
CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that loneliness is not routinely discussed in early intervention services, and a targeted strategy for tackling it is lacking. Co-produced, individualised community approaches, and interventions that target symptoms, stigma and negative self-schemas might be beneficial in alleviating loneliness for people with early psychosis. Empirical research is needed to develop and test such interventions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Early psychosis; Loneliness; Mental health practitioners; Qualitative research

Year:  2021        PMID: 33676456      PMCID: PMC7937295          DOI: 10.1186/s12888-021-03138-w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMC Psychiatry        ISSN: 1471-244X            Impact factor:   3.630


  36 in total

1.  Understanding the social costs of psychosis: the experience of adults affected by psychosis identified within the second Australian National Survey of Psychosis.

Authors:  Helen J Stain; Cherrie A Galletly; Scott Clark; Jacqueline Wilson; Emily A Killen; Lauren Anthes; Linda E Campbell; Mary-Claire Hanlon; Carol Harvey
Journal:  Aust N Z J Psychiatry       Date:  2012-05-29       Impact factor: 5.744

2.  Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups.

Authors:  Allison Tong; Peter Sainsbury; Jonathan Craig
Journal:  Int J Qual Health Care       Date:  2007-09-14       Impact factor: 2.038

Review 3.  Suicide risk in long-term care facilities: a systematic review.

Authors:  Briana Mezuk; Andrew Rock; Matthew C Lohman; Moon Choi
Journal:  Int J Geriatr Psychiatry       Date:  2014-05-22       Impact factor: 3.485

4.  Social networks and support in first-episode psychosis: exploring the role of loneliness and anxiety.

Authors:  Oliver Sündermann; Juliana Onwumere; Fergus Kane; Craig Morgan; Elizabeth Kuipers
Journal:  Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol       Date:  2013-08-17       Impact factor: 4.328

5.  Loneliness in psychosis: a systematic review.

Authors:  Michelle H Lim; John F M Gleeson; Mario Alvarez-Jimenez; David L Penn
Journal:  Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol       Date:  2018-01-11       Impact factor: 4.328

6.  Psychotic withdrawal and the overthrow of psychic reality.

Authors:  Franco De Masi
Journal:  Int J Psychoanal       Date:  2006-06

7.  People living with psychotic illness in 2010: the second Australian national survey of psychosis.

Authors:  Vera A Morgan; Anna Waterreus; Assen Jablensky; Andrew Mackinnon; John J McGrath; Vaughan Carr; Robert Bush; David Castle; Martin Cohen; Carol Harvey; Cherrie Galletly; Helen J Stain; Amanda L Neil; Patrick McGorry; Barbara Hocking; Sonal Shah; Suzy Saw
Journal:  Aust N Z J Psychiatry       Date:  2012-06-13       Impact factor: 5.744

Review 8.  Social networks, support and early psychosis: a systematic review.

Authors:  C Gayer-Anderson; C Morgan
Journal:  Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci       Date:  2012-07-26       Impact factor: 6.892

9.  Social Relationships and Health: The Toxic Effects of Perceived Social Isolation.

Authors:  John T Cacioppo; Stephanie Cacioppo
Journal:  Soc Personal Psychol Compass       Date:  2014-02-01

10.  A systematic review of multi-level stigma interventions: state of the science and future directions.

Authors:  Deepa Rao; Ahmed Elshafei; Minh Nguyen; Mark L Hatzenbuehler; Sarah Frey; Vivian F Go
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2019-02-15       Impact factor: 8.775

View more
  1 in total

1.  Characteristics of Inpatients Prescribed Dopamine Receptor Blocking Agents.

Authors:  Shaina Schwartz; Lauren Dinkla; Jocelyn Pullen; Rachel Bernard; Archana Kumar
Journal:  Psychopharmacol Bull       Date:  2021-11-03
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.