Search

Accessible Summary: What is known on the subject?: Mentalizing is the capacity to understand both one's own and other people's behaviour in terms of mental states, such as, for example, desires, feelings and beliefs.The mentalizing capacities of healthcare professionals help to establish effective therapeutic relationships and, in turn, lead to better patient outcomes. What this paper adds to existing knowledge?: The personal factors positively associated with the mentalizing capacities of healthcare professionals are being female, greater work experience and having a more secure attachment style. Psychosocial factors are having personal experience with psychotherapy, burnout, and in the case of female students, being able to identify with the female psychotherapist role model during training. There is limited evidence that training programmes can improve mentalizing capacities.Although the mentalization field is gaining importance and research is expanding, the implications for mental health nursing have not been previously reviewed. Mental health nurses are underrepresented in research on the mentalizing capacities of healthcare professionals. This is significant given that mental health nurses work closest to patients and thus are more often confronted with patients' behaviour compared to other health care professionals, and constitute a large part of the workforce in mental healthcare for patients with mental illness. What are the implications for practice?: Given the importance of mentalizing capacity of both the patient and the nurse for a constructive working relationship, it is important that mental health nurses are trained in the basic principles of mentalization. Mental health nurses should be able to recognize situations where patients' lack of ability to mentalize creates difficulties in the interaction. They should also be able to recognize their own difficulties with mentalizing and be sensitive to the communicative implications this may have. Introduction: Mentalizing capacities of clinicians help to build effective therapeutic relationships and lead to better patient outcomes. Few studies have focused on factors associated with clinicians' mentalizing capacities and the intervention strategies to improve them. Aim: Present a systematic review of empirical studies on factors associated with healthcare professionals' mentalizing capacities and the effectiveness of intervention programmes designed to improve these capacities. Method: Following PRISMA‐guidelines, a systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library and CINAHL. Results: Out of a systematic search with 1537 hits, 22 studies were included. Personal factors positively associated with mentalizing capacities of healthcare professionals are being female, greater work experience and having a more secure attachment style. Psychosocial factors are having personal experience with psychotherapy, burnout, and in the case of female students, being able to identify with the female psychotherapist role model during training. Evidence that training programmes improve mentalizing capacities is limited. Discussion: Mental health nurses are underrepresented in research on mentalizing capacities of healthcare professionals and training programs to improve these capacities are practically absent. Implications for Practice: For mental health nurses, training in basic mentalizing theory and skills will improve their capacities in building effective working relationships with patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Accessible Summary What Is Known on the Subject? What the Paper Adds to Existing Knowledge? What Are the Implications for Practice? Introduction Aim/Question Methods Results Conclusion Implications for the Practice Patients do not always receive enough information about their diagnosis and their perceived participation in decision‐making about their treatment is low. Some participants reported feeling very uncertain when the physician invited them to choose between these options. Others users expressed their satisfaction with the trend away from paternalistic attitudes in the health system. There is a trend towards pharmacological prescription as a first approximation. This contrasts with the recommendations of scientific organizations based on evidence and cost‐effectiveness studies on the offer of psychological interventions as the first option. The user groups pointed out that active coping, based on exposure to anxiety‐generating situations, made a significant contribution to alleviating their anxiety disorders. However, some of those interviewed rejected this type of intervention. Users diagnosed with anxiety disorders miss more information about the disorder and participation in its treatment. Opposite positions coexist in terms of participation in the choice of treatment. Pharmacological treatment is most commonly the first option offered. This study is an example in itself of the involvement of users in the healthcare process, and therefore placing them at the centre of attention, as reflected in healthcare policies and clinical practice guidelines. It promotes the identification of needs that users diagnosed of anxiety disorders may have, with the aim of putting in place, from healthcare professionals and health services, the necessary supports adapted to these. Mental health nurses are well‐positioned to offer support and guidance during the process of involvement and shared decision‐making. An essential aspect of mental health treatment and recovery is the degree of involvement by health service users in the process.Explore the values, demands and preferences of persons diagnosed with anxiety disorders, their participation in the treatment provided, and the response of the health system in this regard.A qualitative study was conducted, with 51 participants. Nine focus groups and four in‐depth interviews took place.Three broad categories were identified: (1) diagnosis; (2) treatment options offered and shared decision‐making; and (3) coping with the disorder. Sometimes patients do not receive enough information to cover their needs. A trend towards drug prescription as a first approach was observed, while active coping based on exposure to anxiogenic situations was indicated as the most effective option.Shared decision‐making is a necessary aspect of treatment, and the therapeutic process should be adapted to match the service user's preferences, values and needs.This research identifies the needs of patients diagnosed with anxiety disorders and promotes, therefore, from healthcare professionals and services, the provision of measures to meet these needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Accessible Summary: What is known on the subject?: Little is known about how mental health services can cause harm in ways other than medication, talking therapies, diagnosis and detention under the Mental Health Act.The outcomes of people who avoid seeking help from mental health services due to previous experiences of harm are not well known. What this article adds to existing knowledge?: I provide a first‐person perspective of experiences of harm within mental health services, how this impacted my care, the long‐term effects of the harm on my well‐being and my ongoing experiences of avoiding mental health services. What are the implications for mental health nursing?: Healthcare professionals should be aware of the multitude of ways service provision can harm patients, and how, unknown to professionals, patients may create an internal understanding of how to best navigate harmful service environments.Healthcare professionals should have a deeper understanding of the reasons why people may choose not to engage with mental health services, and what impact this may have on them. The recent announcement of the first ever statutory public inquiry into a UK mental health service indicates a growing recognition of iatrogenic harm in mental healthcare. Despite the potential for harm across all services and practices, restrictive practices, psychotherapy, diagnosis and psychiatric medications are often the only areas of mental healthcare given significant attention. While the topic is widely discussed in survivor communities, accounts of harm caused by the everyday workings of services, including team cultures, administrative processes and staff–patient interactions, are missing from academic literature. In this article, I describe my 10‐year journey through mental health services, and how everyday practices, cultures and staff behaviour deeply impacted my ability to receive appropriate care, replicated previously traumatic environments, and damaged my mental health. Taking steps to protect myself from further harm, I self‐discharged and am currently living as a 'service‐avoider'. The ongoing implications of this decision and the long‐term impacts of harm are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]