Ideal and Real Treatment Planning Processes for People With Serious Mental Illness in Public Mental Health Care

Emily B.H. Treichler, Eric A. Evans, William D. Spaulding

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Treatment planning processes are a fundamental component of evidence-based practice in mental health for people with serious mental illness (SMI), who often present with complex concerns and require an interdisciplinary treatment team. It is unclear how well treatment planning practices in usual care settings for SMI adhere to best practices guidelines. In this study, we used qualitative methods to increase understanding of typical treatment planning practices. Twelve mental health providers completed a participatory dialogue focused on discussing perceptions of ideal and real treatment planning processes. Content analysis of the transcription from the dialogue was used to identify major themes and subthemes. Analysis revealed 6 primary themes with 23 subthemes. Providers described the ideal treatment planning process as dynamic and collaborative, including thorough assessment and inclusion of all stakeholders including the consumer, providers, and family members. Real treatment planning was described as directed by institutional and regulatory needs, resulting in treatment plans that were not personalized and not communicated to frontline staff or the consumer. These results indicate that providers have a strong understanding of evidence-based principles of treatment decision-making. However, actual treatment planning processes rarely live up to those principles. Providers identified several obstacles to enacting best practices. Although many obstacles were system-level, providers themselves also contributed to the gap between ideal and real treatment planning. Additional training and education may help to close this gap. Consumer self-advocacy is also important, given that providers often see themselves as lacking agency to make changes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalPsychological Services
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Practice Guidelines
Mental Health
Public Health
Delivery of Health Care
Consumer Advocacy
Evidence-Based Practice
Decision Making
Education

Keywords

  • Person-centered care
  • Provider perspectives
  • Public mental health care
  • Serious mental illness
  • Treatment planning

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Psychology
  • Applied Psychology

Cite this

Ideal and Real Treatment Planning Processes for People With Serious Mental Illness in Public Mental Health Care. / Treichler, Emily B.H.; Evans, Eric A.; Spaulding, William D.

In: Psychological Services, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{a1b11020c2d941f484170be0a9480ac9,
title = "Ideal and Real Treatment Planning Processes for People With Serious Mental Illness in Public Mental Health Care",
abstract = "Treatment planning processes are a fundamental component of evidence-based practice in mental health for people with serious mental illness (SMI), who often present with complex concerns and require an interdisciplinary treatment team. It is unclear how well treatment planning practices in usual care settings for SMI adhere to best practices guidelines. In this study, we used qualitative methods to increase understanding of typical treatment planning practices. Twelve mental health providers completed a participatory dialogue focused on discussing perceptions of ideal and real treatment planning processes. Content analysis of the transcription from the dialogue was used to identify major themes and subthemes. Analysis revealed 6 primary themes with 23 subthemes. Providers described the ideal treatment planning process as dynamic and collaborative, including thorough assessment and inclusion of all stakeholders including the consumer, providers, and family members. Real treatment planning was described as directed by institutional and regulatory needs, resulting in treatment plans that were not personalized and not communicated to frontline staff or the consumer. These results indicate that providers have a strong understanding of evidence-based principles of treatment decision-making. However, actual treatment planning processes rarely live up to those principles. Providers identified several obstacles to enacting best practices. Although many obstacles were system-level, providers themselves also contributed to the gap between ideal and real treatment planning. Additional training and education may help to close this gap. Consumer self-advocacy is also important, given that providers often see themselves as lacking agency to make changes.",
keywords = "Person-centered care, Provider perspectives, Public mental health care, Serious mental illness, Treatment planning",
author = "Treichler, {Emily B.H.} and Evans, {Eric A.} and Spaulding, {William D.}",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1037/ser0000361",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Psychological Services",
issn = "1541-1559",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ideal and Real Treatment Planning Processes for People With Serious Mental Illness in Public Mental Health Care

AU - Treichler, Emily B.H.

AU - Evans, Eric A.

AU - Spaulding, William D.

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Treatment planning processes are a fundamental component of evidence-based practice in mental health for people with serious mental illness (SMI), who often present with complex concerns and require an interdisciplinary treatment team. It is unclear how well treatment planning practices in usual care settings for SMI adhere to best practices guidelines. In this study, we used qualitative methods to increase understanding of typical treatment planning practices. Twelve mental health providers completed a participatory dialogue focused on discussing perceptions of ideal and real treatment planning processes. Content analysis of the transcription from the dialogue was used to identify major themes and subthemes. Analysis revealed 6 primary themes with 23 subthemes. Providers described the ideal treatment planning process as dynamic and collaborative, including thorough assessment and inclusion of all stakeholders including the consumer, providers, and family members. Real treatment planning was described as directed by institutional and regulatory needs, resulting in treatment plans that were not personalized and not communicated to frontline staff or the consumer. These results indicate that providers have a strong understanding of evidence-based principles of treatment decision-making. However, actual treatment planning processes rarely live up to those principles. Providers identified several obstacles to enacting best practices. Although many obstacles were system-level, providers themselves also contributed to the gap between ideal and real treatment planning. Additional training and education may help to close this gap. Consumer self-advocacy is also important, given that providers often see themselves as lacking agency to make changes.

AB - Treatment planning processes are a fundamental component of evidence-based practice in mental health for people with serious mental illness (SMI), who often present with complex concerns and require an interdisciplinary treatment team. It is unclear how well treatment planning practices in usual care settings for SMI adhere to best practices guidelines. In this study, we used qualitative methods to increase understanding of typical treatment planning practices. Twelve mental health providers completed a participatory dialogue focused on discussing perceptions of ideal and real treatment planning processes. Content analysis of the transcription from the dialogue was used to identify major themes and subthemes. Analysis revealed 6 primary themes with 23 subthemes. Providers described the ideal treatment planning process as dynamic and collaborative, including thorough assessment and inclusion of all stakeholders including the consumer, providers, and family members. Real treatment planning was described as directed by institutional and regulatory needs, resulting in treatment plans that were not personalized and not communicated to frontline staff or the consumer. These results indicate that providers have a strong understanding of evidence-based principles of treatment decision-making. However, actual treatment planning processes rarely live up to those principles. Providers identified several obstacles to enacting best practices. Although many obstacles were system-level, providers themselves also contributed to the gap between ideal and real treatment planning. Additional training and education may help to close this gap. Consumer self-advocacy is also important, given that providers often see themselves as lacking agency to make changes.

KW - Person-centered care

KW - Provider perspectives

KW - Public mental health care

KW - Serious mental illness

KW - Treatment planning

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85065973486&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85065973486&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/ser0000361

DO - 10.1037/ser0000361

M3 - Article

C2 - 31120294

AN - SCOPUS:85065973486

JO - Psychological Services

JF - Psychological Services

SN - 1541-1559

ER -