Search

Trauma is a factor impacting the lives of many people experiencing psychiatric disorders. Trauma affects people's responses to illness as well as their interactions with services. This study aimed to explore the understandings and experiences of psychiatrists of working with trauma and emerging models of Trauma-Informed Care. An interpretive qualitative inquiry was undertaken using semi-structured in-depth interviews with psychiatrists. Four themes were identified: Making sense of trauma; A contentious relationship between trauma and mental illness; Treatment made more challenging by trauma; Trauma-Informed Care highlights tensions. Psychiatrists are familiar with the concept of trauma but there are differences in beliefs about its relationship to mental illness that are consequential for practice. Trauma-Informed Care is seen as an effort to humanise mental health services, but with perceived limited impact on psychiatrists' roles. Findings indicate need for further consultation and collaboration with psychiatrists around trauma-informed care implementation; as well as consideration of what is required to develop professional consensus on trauma and its relationship to illness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: In the knowledge base examining experiences of childhood brain injury, the perspectives of children with brain injury are notably lacking. This failure to represent the voices of pediatric clients has resulted in an incomplete knowledge base from which to inform evidence-based rehabilitation practice. In this paper, we examine why the perspectives of children with brain injury are rarely sought and propose a new way forward. Methods: We draw upon current evidence and practices in related fields and present an exemplar from an in-progress qualitative arts-based research project with children with brain injury. Results: Assumptions ingrained in research practices, particularly those surrounding the capacity of 'doubly vulnerable' children with brain injury to produce knowledge, have resulted in the relative exclusion of this group from research that concerns them. For the field to evolve, research practices must value children's first-hand accounts, engage them in co-constructing knowledge about their lives, and invite methods that meet their interests and abilities. Conclusion: By reframing how we think about the capacities of children with disabilities and shifting our research practices to include children with brain injury as knowledgeable participants, it becomes possible to expand the knowledge base upon which clinical rehabilitation practices are built. Current research practices preclude 'doubly vulnerable' pediatric populations, including children with brain injury, from actively contributing to research that concerns them. As a result, the perspectives of children with brain injury are virtually absent from research, rendering the evidence base upon which rehabilitative practices are built incomplete. Reframing how we think about the capacities of children with brain injury can shift how we engage with them, both in research and clinic, and may subsequently impact the knowledge available to us. Implications for client-centred rehabilitation are discussed, including the need to understand children as capable of insight into their own experience, as able to contribute to a more complete understanding of the health phenomena that affect them, and as invaluable and active participants in research and clinical care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using the Canadian context as a case study, the research reported here focuses on in-depth qualitative interviews with 36 researchers, artists and trainees engaged in ‘doing’ arts-based health research (ABHR). We begin to address the gap in ABHR knowledge by engaging in a critical inquiry regarding the issues, challenges and benefits of ABHR methodologies. Specifically, this paper focuses on the tensions experienced regarding academic legitimacy and the use of the arts in producing and disseminating research. Four central areas of tension associated with academic legitimacy are described: balancing structure versus openness and flexibility; academic obligations of truth and accuracy; resisting typical notions of what counts in academia; and expectations vis-à-vis measuring the impact of ABHR. We argue for the need to reconsider what counts as knowledge and to reconceptualize notions of evaluation and rigor in order to effectively support the effective production and dissemination of ABHR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: The aim of this paper is to provide a descriptive review of published qualitative research studies on first episode psychosis (FEP). Methods: A review was undertaken to describe the findings of qualitative studies in early psychosis. Keyword searches in Medline, CINAHL, ASSIA, PsychINFO databases, as well as manual searches of other relevant journals and reference lists of primary papers, were conducted. Results: Thirty-one qualitative papers (representing 27 discrete studies) were identified. The majority reported research concerning young people based in community settings. The research studies were organized according to the following generic social processes: (i) achieving identity; (ii) acquiring perspectives; (iii) doing activity; and, (iv) experiencing relationships. The papers reviewed are based on first-person accounts obtained from individuals who have experienced FEP, their family members and service providers. Conclusion: This descriptive review contributes to our understanding of the complex social processes of achieving identity, acquiring perspectives, doing activities and developing relationships as experienced by young people and the significant others in their world. The cumulative findings highlight the contextually rich and detailed information made possible through qualitative studies of FEP. They begin to account for the active engagement of individuals affected by psychosis in making sense of their experience and suggest that this experience should be understood from within young people's own framework of meaning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

First episode psychosis represents a critical period for intervention to prevent future impairments and to initiate optimal interventions. Using an interpretive interactionist framework, a secondary analysis of interview transcripts was conducted based on the narratives of youth experiences of psychosis. Our goal was to better understand the factors involved in the decision to seek help (or not) from the mental health system. Findings suggest that help seeking is a social process involving a wide range of influences; two such influences are highlighted in this paper, an individual avoidant strategy of ignoring and hiding early symptoms, and the persuasive influence of significant others in the social network. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]