Negotiating the Practical Meaning of Recovery in a Process of Implementation
- 27 Downloads
As implementation of recovery-oriented practices has proven difficult, this study investigates whether a participatory-inspired approach to implementing and adjusting a recovery-oriented model, RENEW-DK, might facilitate a more recovery-oriented practice among the professionals in public sector services. Ten narrative interviews with professionals was analyzed from a Science and Technology Studies perspective, and special attention was devoted to the concepts of distortion and stigmatization. Despite a one-year participatory process of model adjustment and implementation, professionals experienced RENEW-DK as a distortion and thus shaped their practice of RENEW-DK according to organizational requirements and professional beliefs instead of making their practice more recovery-oriented. The study calls attention to the need to acknowledge contradictions between intentions in general models and values in specific organizations with local norms and practices.
KeywordsRecovery-oriented practices Implementation Co-development Mental health Young adults Professionals Employment Education Psychiatry Narrative interviews
The authors would especially like to thank the young adults and professionals participating in this study. We would also like to thank Research Associate Professor JoAnne Malloy, Institute on Disability, University of New Hampshire and co-developer of the RENEW model and collaborator in this project for providing training and assistance throughout implementation of RENEW.
This work was supported by the Intersectoral Research Unit, The Capital Region (Grant Numbers Pb-2014-5, P-2014-2-09); and The Health Foundation (Helsefonden) (Grant Number 2012B199).
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
As stated, Michaela Hoej was employed by the two organizations in which this study was conducted. Otherwise, the Authors declare no conflict of interest.
The project was approved by The Danish Data Protection Agency (journal number 03610 and ID-number: RHP-2015-006). The Regional Committee on Research Ethics was also contacted for approval (Protocol number: H-7-2014-FSP15), but the project was not liable to notification, because no biological material was included in the research. Hence, no approval was necessary. Furthermore, the Danish National Board of Health was contacted (Case number 2014111813), but the project was not liable for notification here either.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Statement of Human Rights
The study was conducted in accordance with the Code of Ethics of the American Anthropological Association (http://s3.amazonaws.com/rdcms-aaa/files/production/public/FileDownloads/pdfs/issues/policy-advocacy/upload/AAA-Ethics-Code-2009.pdf).
- Akrich, M. (1992). The de-scription of technical objects. In W. E. Bijker & J. Law (Eds.), Shaping technology/building society, studies in sociotechnical change (pp. 205–224). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Andreasen, J., Poulsen, S., Hoej, M., & Arnfred, S. (2019). ‘It is important for us to see the mentors as persons’—Participant experiences of a rehabilitation group. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being,14(1), 1632108. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482631.2019.1632108.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Borg, M., Karlsson, B., & Suzie Kim, H. (2010). Double helix of research and practice—Developing a practice model for crisis resolution and home treatment through participatory action research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being,5(1), 4647. https://doi.org/10.3402/qhw.v5i1.4647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Bowker, G. C., & Star, S. L. (2002). Introduction: To classify is human In G. C. Bowker & S. L. Star (Eds.), Sorting things out, classification and its consequences (4. oplag ed., pp. 1–32). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Cahill, C. (2007). Participatory data analysis. In S. Kindon, R. Pain, & M. Kesby (Eds.), Participatory action research approaches and methods connecting people, participation and place (pp. 181–187). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Clarke, A. E., & Star, S. L. (2005). Science, technology, and medicine studies. In H. Joas, G. Miller, R. Dingwall, & H. Joas (Eds.), Handbook of symbolic interactionism (pp. 539–574). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
- Dalgaard, L. G., Johannsen, L. V., Kristiansen, M., & Bloch-Poulsen, J. (2014). Differences as a potential vehicle of organizational development? Co-researching-on-action. In M. Kristiansen & J. Bloch-Poulsen (Eds.), Participation and power: In participatory research and action research. Aalborg: Aalborg Universitetsforlag.Google Scholar
- Danish Regions. (2014). Packages for anxiety and social phobia (Pakkeforløb for angst og social fobi). Retrieved November 3, 2016 from https://www.psykiatri-regionh.dk/vejledning-og-rettigheder/rettigheder/behandlingspakker/Documents/Pakkeforl%C3%B8b%20for%20angst%20og%20social%20fobi.pdf.
- Davidson, L. (2003). Eliciting narratives. Living outside mental illness: Qualitative studies of recovery in schizophrenia (pp. 61–92). New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
- Davidson, L., O’Connell, M. J., Tondora, J., Staeheli, M., & Evans, A. C. (2005). Recovery in serious mental illness: Paradigm shift or shibboleth? In L. Davidson, C. Harding, & L. Spaniol (Eds.), Recovery from severe mental illnesses: Research evidence and implications for practice (Vol. 1, pp. 5–26). Boston: Center for Psychiatric Rehabilitation.Google Scholar
- Davidson, L., & Strauss John, S. (1992). Sense of self in recovery from severe mental illness. British Journal of Medical Psychology,65(2), 131–145. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8341.1992.tb01693.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Esin, C., Fathi, M., & Squire, C. (2013). Narrative analysis: The constructionist approach. In U. Lick (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative data analysis (pp. 203–216). London: SAGE Publications Inc.Google Scholar
- Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., Friedman, R. M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature. Tampa, Florida: Retrieved from (Accessed)Google Scholar
- Hackett, E. J. (2008). The handbook of science and technology studies (3rd ed.). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Hoej, M., Johansen, K. S., Olesen, B. R., & Arnfred, S. M. (2017). “Caught between a rock and a hard place”—Between discourses of empowerment and solicitude: Danish public sector service professionals’ discourses of nonattendance. Qualitative Health Research,27(11), 1686–1700. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732317717962.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Hoej, M., Johansen, K. S., Olesen, B. R., & Arnfred, S. M. (submitted). Pitfalls and stepping stones in working with relationships and supportive networks in public sector services—Perspectives from young adults with mental health difficulties. forthcoming unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
- Holstein, J. A., & Gubrium, J. F. (2013). The constructionist analytics of interpretive practice. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (4th ed., pp. 253–289). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.Google Scholar
- Karlsen, J., & Larrea, M. (2014). Territorial development and action research. Innovation through dialogue. Surrey: GOWER Applied Research.Google Scholar
- Karlsson, B., & Borg, M. (2017). Recovery—Tradisjoner, fornyelser og praksiser. Drammen: Gyldendal Akademisk.Google Scholar
- Korsbek, L. (2017). How to recover? Recovery in Denmark: A work in progress. Journal of Recovery in Mental Health,1(1), 25–33.Google Scholar
- Kragelund, L. (2007). The dilemmas of performing research within one’s own organization. Klinisk Sygepleje,21(1), 72–80.Google Scholar
- Le Boutillier, C., Leamy, M., Bird, V. J., Davidson, L., Williams, J., & Slade, M. (2011). What does recovery mean in practice? A qualitative analysis of international recovery-oriented practice guidance. Psychiatric Services,62(12), 1470–1476. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.001312011.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Le Boutillier, C., Slade, M., Lawrence, V., Bird, V., Chandler, R., Farkas, M., et al. (2015). Competing priorities: Staff perspectives on supporting recovery. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research,42(4), 429–438. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-014-0585-x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lund, J. H. (2011). Kontekstbegrebet. In A. B. D. Bendixen & A. M. Villumsen (Eds.), Ude af sammenhæng, om professionelles arbejde med børn i udsatte positioner. Århus: Systime.Google Scholar
- Malloy, A. M. (2013). The RENEW model: Supporting transition-age youth with emotional and behavioral challenges. Emotional & Behavioral Disorders in Youth,13(2), 38–48.Google Scholar
- Malloy, J. M., Drake, J., Cloutier, H., & Couture, D. (2012). RENEW facilitator’s manual. A secondary transition model for youth and young adults. Durham: Institute on Disability, University of New Hampshire.Google Scholar
- Nielsen, A. J. (2010). Traveling technologies and transformations in health care. (PhD), Copenhagen Business School, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
- Olesen, B. R., & Nordentoft, H. M. (2013). Walking the talk?: A micro-sociological approach to the co-production of knowledge and power in action research. International Journal of Action Research,9(1), 67–94.Google Scholar
- Olesen, B. R., & Pedersen, C. H. (2012). Co-producing knowledge: Between othering, emotionality and dialogue. In L. Phillips, M. Kristiansen, M. Vehviläinen, & E. Gunnarsson (Eds.), Knowledge and power in collaborative research: A reflexive approach (pp. 124–152). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Park, M. M., Zafran, H., Stewart, J., Salsberg, J., Ells, C., Rouleau, S., et al. (2014). Transforming mental health services: A participatory mixed methods study to promote and evaluate the implementation of recovery-oriented services. Implementation Science,9(1), 119. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-014-0119-7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Rapport, N. (2018). Conceptualizing the ‘distortion of human social life’. In N. Rapport (Ed.), Distortion, social processes beyond the structured and systemic (pp. 3–25). London: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
- Rowe, M., Clayton, A., Benedict, P., Bellamy, C., Antunes, K., Miller, R., et al. (2012). Going to the source: Creating a citizenship outcome measure by community-based participatory research methods. Psychiatric Services,63(5), 445–450. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.201100272.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Shepherd, G., Boardman, J., & Burns, M. (2010). Implementing recovery—A methology for organizational change, policy paper. London: Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health.Google Scholar
- Shepherd, G., Boardman, J., & Slade, M. (2008). Policy paper. Making recovery a reality. London: Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health.Google Scholar
- Sundhedsstyrelsen. (2009). National strategi for psykiatri. Copenhagen: Retrieved September 26, 2018, from http://www.sst.dk/~/media/EE63F63540B4423989EB160335398B84.ashx.
- Vikkelsø, S., & Vinge, S. (2004). Hverdagens arbejde og organisering i sundhedsvæsenet. Copenhagen: Handelshøjskolens Forlag.Google Scholar
- Waldemar, A. K., Esbensen, B. A., Korsbek, L., Petersen, L., & Arnfred, S. (2018a). Recovery-oriented practice: Participant observations of the interactions between patients and health professionals in mental health inpatient settings. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing,28, 318–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar