Psychiatr Prax 2017; 44(02): 99-104
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-108968
Originalarbeit
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Mitforschen, aber wie? Entwicklung und Evaluation eines Forschungstrainings für Psychiatrieerfahrene

How to do Research? Development and Evaluation of a Research Training for Patients with Mental Disorders
Anna Levke Brütt
1   Institut und Poliklinik für Medizinische Psychologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf
,
Tabea Bernges
1   Institut und Poliklinik für Medizinische Psychologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf
,
Julia Magaard
1   Institut und Poliklinik für Medizinische Psychologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf
,
EX-IN-Pilots,
Gyöngyvér Sielaff
3   Klinik und Poliklinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Publikationsdatum:
14. Dezember 2015 (online)

Zusammenfassung

Ziel der Studie Die Ziele dieses Projektes waren ein Forschungstraining (1) zu entwickeln und (2) zu evaluieren.

Methodik Die Inhalte und Methoden wurden in 5 partizipativen Treffen ausgearbeitet. Das Forschungstraining wurde anschließend für 2 Gruppen mit N = 28 Teilnehmern durchgeführt.

Ergebnisse Das Interesse an Forschung hat sich durch das Training nicht verändert, jedoch zeigten sich Effekte hinsichtlich des forschungsbezogenen Empowerments.

Schlussfolgerung Das Training wurde insgesamt positiv bewertet. Eine Verbreitung und Weiterentwicklung des Trainings ist geplant.

Abstract

Objective Participation of mental health services users in research is increasingly acknowledged in Germany. Principles for successful involvement include research training for service users. The aims of the project were (1) to develop and (2) to evaluate a research training.

Methods The research training was developed in five participatory meetings and piloted with 28 participants. They answered questions on the research training and about their interest in research, research-related empowerment and research participation.

Results Interest in research did not change. But there is a difference between research-related empowerment before (t1) and after (t2) the research training (z = – 2.237; p = 0.025). The number of participants registered in scientific studies increased from 4 (t1) to 8 three months later (t3) whereas the number of participants reporting own research ideas decreased from 7 (t1) to 5 (t3).

Conclusion Although interest has not been affected, the evaluation shows significant effects on research-related empowerment in participants. Results concerning transfer are divergent. However, feedback was positive. We are planning to disseminate and refine the training.

 
  • Literatur

  • 1 Dirmaier J, Härter M. Stärkung der Selbstbeteiligung in der Rehabilitation. Bundesgesundheitsbl 2011; 54: 411-419
  • 2 Trivedi P, Wykes T. From passive subjects to equal partners. Qualitative review of user involvement in research. Br J Psychiatry 2002; 181: 468-472
  • 3 Staley K. Exploring Impact: Public involvement in NHS, public health and social care research. Eastleigh: INVOLVE; 2009
  • 4 Mathie E, Wilson P, Poland F. et al. Consumer involvement in health research: A UK scoping and survey. Int J Consum Stud 2014; 38: 35-44
  • 5 Snape D, Kirkham J, Britten N. et al. Exploring perceived barriers, drivers, impacts and the need for evaluation of public involvement in health and social care research: a modified Delphi study. BMJ Open 2014; 4: e004943
  • 6 Staley K, Buckland SA, Hayes H. et al. 'The missing links': Understanding how context and mechanism influence the impact of public involvement in research. Health Expect 2014; 17: 755-764
  • 7 Staniszewska S, Herron-Marx S, Mockford C. Measuring the impact of patient and public involvement: The need for an evidence base. Int J Qual Health Care 2008; 20: 373-374
  • 8 Brett J, Staniszewska S, Mockford C. et al. A systematic review of the impact of patient and public involvement on service users, researchers and communities. Patient 2014; 7: 387-395
  • 9 Brett J, Staniszewska S, Mockford C. et al. Mapping the impact of patient and public involvement on health and social care research: a systematic review. Health Expect 2014; 17: 637-650
  • 10 World Health Organization. User empowerment in mental health – a statement by the WHO Regional Office for Europe. Copenhagen: World Health Organization; 2010
  • 11 Utschakowski J, Sielaff G, Bock T. Vom Erfahrenen zum Experten: wie Peers die Psychiatrie verändern. 1.. Aufl. Bonn: Psychiatrie-Verl.; 2009
  • 12 Puschner B, Steffen S, Slade M. et al. Clinical decision making and outcome in routine care for people with severe mental illness (CEDAR): study protocol. BMC Psychiatry 2010; 10: 90
  • 13 Krumm S, Becker T. Der Einbezug von Nutzern psychiatrischer Angebote in die psychiatrische Versorgungsforschung. Psychiat Prax 2006; 33: 59-66
  • 14 Reichhart T, Kissling W, Scheuring E. et al. Patientenbeteiligung in der Psychiatrie – eine kritische Bestandsaufnahme. Psychiat Prax 2008; 35: 111-121
  • 15 Kirschning S, Pimmer V, Matzat J. et al. Beteiligung Betroffener an der Forschung. Rehabilitation 2012; 51 (Suppl. 01) 12-20
  • 16 Telford R, Faulkner A. Learning about service user involvement in mental health research. J Ment Health 2004; 13: 549-559
  • 17 Rose D, Fleischman P, Wykes T. What are mental health service usersʼ priorities for research in the UK?. J Ment Health 2008; 17: 520-530
  • 18 Matzat J. Selbsthilfe trifft Wissenschaft – Zur Patientenbeteiligung an der Entwicklung von Leitlinien. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes 2013; 107: 314-319
  • 19 Boote J, Telford R, Cooper C. Consumer involvement in health research: a review and research agenda. Health Policy 2002; 61: 213-236
  • 20 Faulkner A. Principles and motives for service user involvement in mental health research. In: Wallkraft J, Schrank B, Amering M. eds. Handbook of service user involvement in mental health research. Chichester, West Sussex, UK; Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell; 2009: 13-24
  • 21 Berger B, Gerlach A, Groth S. et al. Competence training in evidence-based medicine for patients, patient counsellors, consumer representatives and health care professionals in Austria: a feasibility study. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes 2013; 107: 44-52
  • 22 Berger B, Steckelberg A, Meyer G. et al. Training of patient and consumer representatives in the basic competencies of evidence-based medicine: a feasibility study. BMC Med Educ 2010; 10: 16
  • 23 Hancock N, Bundy A, Tamsett S. et al. Participation of mental health consumers in research: Training addressed and reliability assessed. Aust Occup Ther J 2012; 59: 218-224
  • 24 von Unger H. Partizipative Forschung. Einführung in die Forschungspraxis. Wiesbaden: Springer; 2014
  • 25 Seifert JW. Visualisieren, präsentieren, moderieren. [der Klassiker]. 27.. Aufl. Offenbach: GABAL-Verl; 2009
  • 26 Zumbach J, Spinath B, Schahn J. et al. Entwicklung einer Kurzskala zur Lehrevaluation. In: Krämer M, Preiser S, Brusdeylins K. Hrsg. Psychologiedidaktik und Evaluation. Göttingen: V&R unipress; 2007: 317-326
  • 27 Kirschning S, Matzat J, Buschmann-Steinhage R. Partizipative Rehabilitationsforschung. Prävention und Gesundheitsförderung 2013; 8: 191-199