Open Dialogue adherence and fidelity tools

Olson, Mary

doi:10.4324/9781351199599-50

Cited by 19 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2. The context of leadership : Open Dialogue, as it has developed as a practice, has two core components – the dialogical approach (requiring practice change) and the service delivery approach (requiring organizational change) (Olson et al, 2014 ). Implementing the change towards Open Dialogue in mental health services therefore required services to address leadership and power relations across two dimensions: the clinical (medical) and the organizational (administrative-managerial).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Organizational Change in Complex Systems: Organizational and Leadership Factors in the Introduction of Open Dialogue to Mental Health Care Services

Lennon

Hopkins

Einboden

et al. 2022

Community Ment Health J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conventional mental health services are frequently criticized for failing to support people and communities in their care. Open Dialogue is a non-conventional humanistic approach to mental health care, which has been implemented in many different settings globally. At two Australian public health care services, implementation of the approach led to positive client outcomes and sustained organizational and clinical change. The aim of the study was to identify and explore the organizational, management, leadership and cultural factors that contributed to sustained implementation in these complex systems. We conducted nine individual semi-structured interviews of health care leaders and managers from the two sites. Transcriptions of the interviews were analyzed thematically. Leaders facilitated a gradual development of clinical and organizational legitimacy for the non-standardized Open Dialogue approach by holding the anxiety and frustration of practitioners and parts of the administration, cultivating cultural change and adaptation and by continually removing organizational obstacles.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Organizational Change in Complex Systems: Organizational and Leadership Factors in the Introduction of Open Dialogue to Mental Health Care Services

Lennon

Hopkins

Einboden

et al. 2022

Community Ment Health J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition to the core principles, there are specific elements of the structure of the meetings and interaction style that define the therapeutic process of Open Dialogue. These include: the presence of more than one clinician, involvement of the client’s support network (e.g., family, significant others, or close friends), communication methods that emphasize transparency (e.g., clinicians sharing their thoughts in meetings and not keeping private notes), reflective listening (e.g., clinicians reflecting on the situation in the presence of client and their support network), and nonpathologizing language (Olson, Seikkula, & Ziedonis, 2014).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Client, family, and clinician experiences of Open Dialogue-based services.

Gidugu¹,

Rogers²,

Gordon³

et al. 2021

Psychological Services

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The last 2 decades have seen tremendous growth in programs to address first-episode psychosis, which typically affects adolescents and young adults. Open Dialogue is a program that has shown promise in FEP treatment in Finland and is gaining popularity internationally. Implementation of this model in cultural and health care contexts that differ from Finland has not been studied. We conducted a qualitative study as part of the first pilot study of Open Dialogue in the United States to understand factors critical for implementation of the model. We interviewed 6 clients, 10 family members, and 9 clinicians. They identified several unique and beneficial features of the approach, focusing particularly on the value of family involvement, transparency, respectfulness, and the collaborative nature of Open Dialogue. Contextual factors, particularly regarding funding for this model in the current United States health care environment, are key determinants to address for future implementation of Open Dialogue in the United States.

show abstract

“…21 Key aspects of open dialogue include continuity of care, immediate care, tolerance of uncertainty, dialogic practice and clinical meetings that involve patients’ networks. 12,22–24 A core feature of the open dialogue model is valuing individuals with ‘lived experience’ and therefore peer support workers are integral members of the clinical team. 12…”

Section: Open Dialoguementioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring patients' experience of peer-supported open dialogue and standard care following a mental health crisis: qualitative 3-month follow-up study

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Experience of crisis care may vary across different care models. Aims To explore the experience of care in standard care and ‘open dialogue’ (a peer-supported community service focused on open dialogue and involving social networks for adults with a recent mental health crisis) 3 months after a crisis. Method We conducted semi-structured interviews with 11 participants (6 received open dialogue; 5 received treatment as usual (TAU)) in a feasibility study of open dialogue and analysed the data using a three-step inductive thematic analysis to identify themes that (a) were frequently endorsed and (b) represented the experiences of all participants. Results Four themes emerged: (a) feeling able to rely on and access mental health services; (b) supportive and understanding family and friends; (c) having a choice and a voice; and (d) confusion and making sense of experiences. Generally, there was a divergence in experience across the two care models. Open dialogue participants often felt able to rely on and access services and involve their family and friends in their care. TAU participants described a need to rely on services and difficulty when it was not met, needing family and friends for support and wanting them to be more involved in their care. Some participants across both care models experienced confusion after a crisis and described benefits of sense-making. Conclusions Understanding crisis care experiences across different care models can inform service development in crisis and continuing mental healthcare services.

show abstract

Open Dialogue adherence and fidelity tools

Cited by 19 publications

References 0 publications

Organizational Change in Complex Systems: Organizational and Leadership Factors in the Introduction of Open Dialogue to Mental Health Care Services

Organizational Change in Complex Systems: Organizational and Leadership Factors in the Introduction of Open Dialogue to Mental Health Care Services

Client, family, and clinician experiences of Open Dialogue-based services.

Exploring patients' experience of peer-supported open dialogue and standard care following a mental health crisis: qualitative 3-month follow-up study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About