Research Watch: inclusion of people’s social networks can help when they experience psychosis

Published date02 August 2019
Pages129-135
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1108/MHSI-05-2019-0013
Date02 August 2019
AuthorSue Holttum
Subject MatterHealth & social care,Mental health,Social inclusion
Research Watch: inclusion of peoples
social networks can help when they
experience psychosis
Sue Holttum
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine two recent papers on Open Dialogue, an
approach for people experiencing psychosis that involves peoples social networks from the beginning,
and aims to empower the service user and their network to develop a shared view of what is happening and
what to do.
Design/methodology/approach A search was carried out for recent papers on Open Dialogue.
Findings One paper reported on outcomes after an average of 20 years for people treated with Open
Dialogue approach compared with usual treatment in Finland. Outcome was statistically significantly better
for people who received Open Dialogue. A second paper reported on interviews with 20 people who had
received Open Dialogue approach 20 years earlier. Participants told stories of life events and circumstances
that caused accumulating stress leading to the mental health crisis. They gradually came through by their
own actions and support from others. This may reflect how Open Dialogue emphasises personal agency and
social support.
Originality/value These are the first two papers to report on longer-term follow-up after Open Dialogue
treatment. They continue to support the suggestion that Open Dialogue can be more beneficial than usual
treatment. By including and working with peoples social networks, Open Dialogue may be particularly
efficient at mobilising peoples social resources and empowering their personal agency.
Keywords Outcomes, Social networks, Psychosis, Adversities, Open Dialogue
Paper type Viewpoint
In this Research Watch paper, I discuss two recent papers from the group of clinical
researchers who developed the Open Dialogue form of treatment for people who experience
psychosis. This approach was begun in Western Lapland, a part of Finland, towards
the end of the last century. The approach seems to have some good results in both the USA
and Finland (Gordon et al., 2016; Seikkula et al., 2011). Open Dialogue training has become
available in various countries including England in recent years (see their international website:
http://open-dialogue.net/). Bergström et al. (2018) describe the long-term outcomes for 108
people who received the Open Dialogue approach, and compare them with people who
received more usu al psychiatric tre atment in Finland ov er the same time peri od of time.
Bergström et al. (2019) report on interviews with 20 people who received the Open Dialogue
approach on average 20 years before, to ask them about their life and how they understand
their difficulties.
Comparing long-term outcomes in Open Dialogue with other treatment
Bergströmet al. (2018) discuss the fact that peoplewho receive a diagnosis ofpsychosis can have
a range of different experiences, different needs and different outcomes. They point out the
increase in early-intervention services, and describe one of these that started in Finland in the
1980s, called the needs adapted approach. However, in Western Lapland this approach was
further modified,and became the Open Dialogueapproach by about 1995. Bergströmet al. (2018)
Sue Holttum is based at the
Salomons Institute for Applied
Psychology, Canterbury Christ
Church University,
Canterbury, UK.
DOI 10.1108/MHSI-05-2019-0013 VOL. 23 NO. 3 2019, pp. 129-135, © Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 2042-8308
j
MENTALHEALTH AND SOCIAL INCLUSION
j
PAG E 1 2 9

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT