Jenny Zhen-Duan1,2, Anita Chary3,4, Amanda NeMoyer5, Marie Fukuda1, Sheri Lapatin Markle1, Mercedes Hoyos6, Liao Zhang1, Larimar Fuentes1, Gilberto Pérez7, Valeria Chambers8, Jill Rosenthal9,10, Najeia Mention9,11, Margarita Alegría1,2,12. 1. Disparities Research Unit, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 2. Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 3. Department of Medicine, Section of Health Services Research, Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA. 4. Department of Emergency Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA. 5. Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. 6. Department of Political Science, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts, USA. 7. Bienvenido Community Solutions, LLC, Goshen, Indiana, USA. 8. The Transformation Center, Roxbury, Massachusetts, USA. 9. National Academy for State Health Policy, Portland, Maine, USA. 10. Center for American Progress, Washington, District of Columbia, USA. 11. Counseling & Psychological Services (CAPS), University of Hartford, Hartford, Connecticut, USA. 12. Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore how stakeholders responded to research evidence regarding supported employment (e.g., vocational rehabilitation), and ways evidence could be incorporated into policy and action. DATA SOURCES: Qualitative data were collected from three stakeholder groups-people with lived experience of mental health challenges, community health advocates, and state health policy makers. STUDY DESIGN: This study consisted of two sequential steps. First, three focus groups were conducted after presenting stakeholder groups (inclusive of 22 participants) with simulation data showing that improvement in employment status had a stronger impact on mental health than improvement in education or income for racially/ethnically diverse groups. Second, with guidance from focus group findings, researchers conducted additional in-depth interviews (n = 19) to gain a deeper understanding of the opportunities and challenges related to incorporating these findings into policy and practice. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Focus groups and in-depth interviews were conducted, audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: People with lived experience described the positive effect of employment in their own life while highlighting the need to increase workplace accommodations and social supports for those with mental health challenges. Across stakeholder groups, participants emphasized the need for linguistic and cultural competence to promote equity in delivery of supported employment programs. Stakeholders also underscored that centralizing existing resources and using evidence-based approaches are crucial for successful implementation. CONCLUSION: Implementing effective supported employment programs should focus on meeting the specific needs of target individuals, as many of those needs are not considered in current employment-related programming. Collecting information from diverse users of research demonstrates what other aspects of supported employment are required for the likelihood of successful uptake. Implementation and dissemination efforts need to fortify collaborations and knowledge transfer between stakeholders to optimize supported employment and mental health resources.
OBJECTIVE: To explore how stakeholders responded to research evidence regarding supported employment (e.g., vocational rehabilitation), and ways evidence could be incorporated into policy and action. DATA SOURCES: Qualitative data were collected from three stakeholder groups-people with lived experience of mental health challenges, community health advocates, and state health policy makers. STUDY DESIGN: This study consisted of two sequential steps. First, three focus groups were conducted after presenting stakeholder groups (inclusive of 22 participants) with simulation data showing that improvement in employment status had a stronger impact on mental health than improvement in education or income for racially/ethnically diverse groups. Second, with guidance from focus group findings, researchers conducted additional in-depth interviews (n = 19) to gain a deeper understanding of the opportunities and challenges related to incorporating these findings into policy and practice. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Focus groups and in-depth interviews were conducted, audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: People with lived experience described the positive effect of employment in their own life while highlighting the need to increase workplace accommodations and social supports for those with mental health challenges. Across stakeholder groups, participants emphasized the need for linguistic and cultural competence to promote equity in delivery of supported employment programs. Stakeholders also underscored that centralizing existing resources and using evidence-based approaches are crucial for successful implementation. CONCLUSION: Implementing effective supported employment programs should focus on meeting the specific needs of target individuals, as many of those needs are not considered in current employment-related programming. Collecting information from diverse users of research demonstrates what other aspects of supported employment are required for the likelihood of successful uptake. Implementation and dissemination efforts need to fortify collaborations and knowledge transfer between stakeholders to optimize supported employment and mental health resources.
Keywords:
dissemination and implementation research; health disparities; health policy; mental health; minoritized groups; people of color; social determinants of health; supported employment
Authors: Kim T Mueser; Robin E Clark; Michael Haines; Robert E Drake; Gregory J McHugo; Gary R Bond; Susan M Essock; Deborah R Becker; Rosemarie Wolfe; Karin Swain Journal: J Consult Clin Psychol Date: 2004-06
Authors: Giyeon Kim; Claudia X Aguado Loi; David A Chiriboga; Yuri Jang; Patricia Parmelee; Rebecca S Allen Journal: J Psychiatr Res Date: 2010-05-26 Impact factor: 4.791