Impact of co-facilitated information programmes on outcomes for service users and family members: the EOLAS programmes (paper 2)

Abstract

The EOLAS programmes offer a novel template for communication and information sharing in a way that embodies the principles of collaboration and offers users and families a meaningful opportunity to become involved in service design, delivery and evaluation.

Outcomes of a co‐facilitation skills training programme for mental health service users, family members, and clinicians: the EOLAS project

“…As the previous pilot evaluation of the EOLAS training (Higgins et al . ) and other literature illustrate (Coulthard et al . ), the traditional roles assumed by professionals and peer workers can sometimes be resistant to change, with both parties lapsing back into them, thereby maintaining power differentials in relation to status and input.…”

“…In line with previous studies (Coulthard et al 2013;Thorneycroft & Dobel-Ober 2015), the present study demonstrates that a collaborative model in the production and delivery of services can work effectively, while at the same time, has the potential to advance the personal recovery of service user co-facilitators, as many reported experiencing the process as empowering. As the previous pilot evaluation of the EOLAS training (Higgins et al 2017b) and other literature illustrate (Coulthard et al 2013), the traditional roles assumed by professionals and peer workers can sometimes be resistant to change, with both parties lapsing back into them, thereby maintaining power differentials in relation to status and input. However, on the balance of the evidence provided in the present study, the training seems to have effectively surmounted these obstacles, with participants reporting that, over time, the power difference between professionals and users of services was dismantled, and genuine partnerships formed.…”

“…Qualitative interviews post-facilitation indicated that, although the co-facilitation model (peer and clinician) was acceptable to all, and the presence of peers was highly valued, the 2-day programme was not sufficient to teach facilitation skills, familiarize trainees with the content of the EOLAS programmes, or to overcome power differentials between clinicians and peer facilitators. Feedback suggested that, in some cases, clinicians were positioned as the 'leaders', with clinical knowledge becoming more valuable than the voice of self-experience (Higgins et al 2017b). As this power imbalance had the potential to undermine peer involvement, the EOLAS facilitator training module was extended to a 4day training programme, with a strong emphasis on action learning and reflection.…”

“…Feedback suggested that, in some cases, clinicians were positioned as the ‘leaders’, with clinical knowledge becoming more valuable than the voice of self‐experience (Higgins et al . ). As this power imbalance had the potential to undermine peer involvement, the EOLAS facilitator training module was extended to a 4‐day training programme, with a strong emphasis on action learning and reflection.…”

Factors Impacting the Implementation of a Psychoeducation Intervention Within the Mental Health System: a Multisite Study Using the Consolidation Framework for Implementation Research

“…Similar to all non-pharmacological interventions in mental health care, the translation of psychoeducation's proven e cacy into routine mental health care has endured a protracted and challenging path. Despite the strength of the evidence-base in relation to psychoeducation [15][16][17][18][19][20], and its successful integration into policy recommendation and clinical guidelines [21][22][23][24], equitable access for many service users and family members has still not been achieved [25]. Alongside nascent research exploring the implementation determinants of one to one psychoeducation [26][27][28][29], a recent scoping review [30] reported some participant, practitioner, intervention, organisational and structural barriers and facilitators to group psychoeducation.…”