Download PDF
Psychiatr Prax 2017; 44(06): 348-355
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-113093
Originalarbeit
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Zwischen Offenheit und Ablehnung – Die Einstellung von Psychiatriepflegenden gegenüber dem Risikoverhalten ihrer Patienten: eine qualitative Studie

Negotiating the Space Between Openness and Rejection – Mental Health Nurses’ Attitudes Towards Risk Behaviour of their Patients – A Qualitative Study
Christian Burr
1   Universitätsklinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Universitäre Psychiatrische Dienste, Bern, Schweiz
,
Dirk Richter
2   Fachbereich Gesundheit, Berner Fachhochschule, Bern, Schweiz
3   Direktion Psychiatrische Rehabilitation, Universitäre Psychiatrische Dienste, Bern, Schweiz
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
12 September 2016 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Ziel der Studie Beschreiben der Einstellung von Mitarbeitenden gegenüber dem Eingehen positiver Risiken ihrer Patienten, da darüber wenig bekannt ist und die Einstellung wesentlich zum Verständnis der aktuellen Praxis beiträgt.

Methodik Anhand der Inhaltsanalyse von 4 Fokusgruppeninterviews wurde die Einstellung der Pflegenden gegenüber dem Eingehen positiver Risiken ihrer Patienten untersucht und wie sie ihre Institution dabei wahrnehmen.

Ergebnisse Pflegende bewerten Risiken eher negativ, haben eine ambivalente Einstellung gegenüber positiven Risiken und nehmen ihre Institution auch so wahr.

Schlussfolgerung Die Ergebnisse bestätigen Ergebnisse anderer Studien. Klare Leitlinien zum Thema fehlen in der Praxis.

Abstract

Objective Personal recovery as a key concept in mental health requests that people with severe mental illness need support in taking positive risks, especially from mental health nurses as key players in this context. In German-speaking countries, studies regarding positive risk-taking seem scarce. Attitude as a concept of social psychology seems to be important to this topic, because it strongly influences the human behavior. Therefore, this study examines the attitudes of mental health nurses in outpatient settings towards their patients taking positive risks and their perception of the institutional position regarding this issue.

Methods Four focus group interviews were conducted and analyzed using a descriptive content-analysis approach.

Results Three main categories were identified: the concept of risk, the nurses’ ambivalence and the institutions’ ambivalence. Nurses seem to generally connote risk negatively. Their attitudes towards positive risks can be described as ambivalent, oscillating between openness and aversion and their institutions perceive it similarly.

Conclusion Results from other studies can be confirmed. Nurses expect clear position from their institution regarding positive risk-taking and increased support. Guidelines are missing in practice.

Schlüsselwörter

Risiko - Recovery - psychiatrische Pflege - Einstellung - qualitative Inhaltsanalyse

Keywords

risk - personal recovery - mental health nursing - attitude - qualitative research
 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Amering M, Schmolke M. Recovery. Das Ende der Unheilbarkeit. 5. Aufl. Bonn: Psychiatrie Verlag; 2012
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Anthony WA. Recovery from Mental Illness: The Guiding Vision of the Mental Health Service System in the 1990s. Psychiatr Rehabil J 1993; 16: 11-23
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Deegan PE. Recovery: The lived Experience of Rehabilitation. Psychiatr Rehabil J 1988; 11: 11-19
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Leamy M, Bird V, Le Boutillier C. et al. Conceptual framework for personal recovery in mental health: systematic review and narrative synthesis. Br J Psychiatry 2011; 199: 445-452
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Farkas M. The vision of recovery today: what it is and what it means for services. World Psychiatry 2007; 6: 68-74
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychiatrie, Psychotherapie und Nervenheilkunde. S3-Leitlinie. Psychosoziale Therapien bei schweren psychischen Erkrankungen. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2012
    Google Scholar
  • 7 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. National Clinical Guideline Number 82, Schizophrenia. Core interventions in the treatment and management of Schizophrenia in adults in primary and secondary care (Update Edition). London: The British Psychological Society and the Royal College of Psychiatrists; 2010
    Google Scholar
  • 8 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Sercice User Experience in adult mental health. Improving the experience of care for people using adult NHS mental health services. National Clinical Guidance Number 136. London: The British Psychological Society and the Royal College of Psychiatrists; 2012
    Google Scholar
  • 9 World Health Organization. Europäischer Aktionsplan für psychische Gesundheit. Cesme, Türkei: World Health Organization, Regionalkomitee Europa; 2013
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Slade M. Personal Recovery and Mental Illness. A guide for mental health professionals. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2009
    Google Scholar
  • 11 [Anonym]. Implementing Recovery through Organisational Change (ImROC). London: Mental Health Network; 2012
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Burr C, Seidel E, Abderhalden C. Umsetzung eines recovery-orientierten Konzeptes auf der psychiatrischen Station Lüthi. Praxisbericht und Evaluation aus der Schweiz. In: Burr C, Schulz M, Winter A. et al., Hrsg. Recovery in der Praxis Voraussetzungen, Interventionen, Projekte. Köln: Psychiatrie Verlag; 2013: 141-158
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Mahler L, Jarchov-Jàdi I, Montag C. et al. Das Weddinger Modell. Ressillienz- und Ressourcenorientierung im klinischen Kontext. Köln: Psychiatrie Verlag; 2013
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Alexander A, Hutchison C, Bradstreet S. et al. Recovery praktisch! Schulungsunterlagen. Bern: Universitäre Psychiatrische Dienste; 2012
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Slade M. 100 Wege um Recovery zu unterstützen. Bielefeld: Fachhochschule der Diakonie; 2013
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Stickley T, Felton A. Promoting recovery through therapeutic risk taking. Ment Health Pract 2006; 9: 26-30
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Horatio – European Psychiatric Nurses. Deklaration von Turku. Der Beitrag der Psychiatrischen Pflege zur Versorgung von Menschen mit psychischen Beeinträchtigungen. 2011. Im Internet: http://www.horatio-web.eu/downloads/The_Turku_Declaration_-_German.pdf (Stand: 21.07.2016)
    Google Scholar
  • 18 World Health Organization. Europäische Gesundheitsbericht 2009. Gesundheit und Gesundheitssysteme. Kopenhagen: World Health Organisation; 2009
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Sauter D, Richter D. Experten für den Alltag – Professionelle Pflege in psychiatrischen Handlungsfeldern. Bonn: Psychiatrie Verlag; 1999
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Crowe M, Carlyle D. Deconstructing risk assessment and management in mental health nursing. J Adv Nurs 2003; 43: 19-27
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Godin P. 'You don’t tick boxes on a form': A study of how community mental health nurses assess and manage risk. Health Risk Soc 2004; 6: 347-360
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Manuel J, Crowe M. Clinical responsibility, accountability, and risk aversion in mental health nursing: A descriptive, qualitative study. Int J Ment Health Nurs 2014; 23: 336-343
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Tickle A, Brown D, Hayward M. Can we risk recovery? A grounded theory of clinical psychologists’ perceptions of risk and recovery-oriented mental health services. Psychol Psychother 2014; 87: 96-110
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Robertson JP, Collinson C. Positive risk taking: Whose risk is it? An exploration in community outreach teams in adult mental health and learning disability services. Health Risk Soc 2011; 13: 147-164
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Haddock G, Maio G. Einstellungen: Inhalt, Struktur und Funktionen. In: Jonas K, Stroebe W, Hewstone M. Hrsg. Sozialpsychologie. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2007: 187-223
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Creswell JW. Designing a Qualitative Study. In: Creswell JW. eds. Qualitative inquiry and research design Choosing among five approaches. 3. Aufl. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications; 2007: 42-68
    Google Scholar
  • 27 Polit DF, Beck CT. Nursing Research. Generating and Assessing Evidence for Nursing Practice. 9. Aufl. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2012
    Google Scholar
  • 28 Barbour R. Doing Focus Groups. London: SAGE Publications; 2007
    Google Scholar
  • 29 Happell B. Focus groups in nursing research: an appropriate method or the latest fad?. Nurse Res 2007; 14: 18-24
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Krueger RA, Casey MA. Developing a Questioning Route. In: Krueger RA, Casey MA. eds. Focus Groups A Practical Guide for Applied Research. 4. Aufl. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications; 2009: 35-61
    Google Scholar
  • 31 Elo S, Kyngäs H. The qualitative content analysis process. J Adv Nurs 2008; 62: 107-115
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Saldaña J. The Coding Manual für Qualitative Researcher. 3. Aufl. London: SAGE Publications; 2013
    Google Scholar
  • 33 VERBI GmbH. MAXQDA – The Art of Data Analyses. Berlin: Verbi Software GmbH; 2014
    Google Scholar
  • 34 Whittemore R, Chase SK, Mandle CL. Validity in Qualitative Research. Qual Health Res 2001; 11: 522-537
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Alaszewski A. Risk decision-making and mental health. In: Coffey M, Iannigan B. eds. The Handbook of Community Mental Health Nursing. London: Routhledge; 2003: 187-197
    Google Scholar
  • 36 Alaszewski A, Alaszewski H, Ayer S. et al. Managing Risk in Community Practice. London: Baillière Tindall; 2000
    Google Scholar
  • 37 Zinn JO. Towards a better understanding of risk-taking: key concepts, dimensions and perspectives. Health Risk Soc 2015; 17: 99-114
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Richter D, Hahn S. Formelles und informelles Aufgabenprofil in der ambulanten psychiatrischen Pflege aus Sicht von Pflegenden: Eine Meta-Synthese. Pflege 2009; 22: 129-142
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Seale J, Nind M, Simmons B. Transforming positive risk-taking practices: the possibilities of creativity and resilience in learning disability contexts. Scan J Disability Res 2012; 15: 233-248
    PubMedGoogle Scholar