Dee MacDonald

Service user involvement: impact and participation: a survey of service user and staff perspectives

BackgroundOver the last 20 years governments around the world have promoted user involvement in an effort to improve the quality of health services. Despite the growing emphasis placed on user involvement in England, there is a paucity of recent studies looking at how service users and professionals perceive the outcomes of user involvement policies. This study aimed to examine the overall levels of participation in service user involvement in mental health services among professionals and service users and ascertain their views on the impact of involvement activity on various areas of service delivery.MethodsA cross-sectional survey of service users and providers within community mental health services. The sampling was carried out across three mental health Trusts, two serving people living in inner-city areas and a third covering a mixed rural/urban population. A questionnaire with closed and open ended questions was used to gather the responses of service users and frontline professionals. As a mixed methods study, the analysis consisted of both quantitative and qualitative approaches.ResultsThree hundred and two service users responded to the survey with a response rate of 48%. One hundred and forty three frontline mental health professionals, 26.8% of those approached submitted questionnaires. Almost half of service users (N=138, 45.7%,) and healthcare professionals (N=143, 55.9%) reported having been involved in some form of user involvement activity. Although there were some differences in the responses of service users and frontline professionals, both groups reported that service user involvement was having a positive impact.ConclusionsThe findings show that, within the three mental health trusts examined in this study, service user involvement has become widespread and is perceived by both staff and service users to be a good policy. The study had some important limitations. The questionnaire used was based on existing literature, however it was not subjected to psychometric testing. In addition, response rates were low, particularly among professionals. Despite the limitations, the findings are encouraging, offering important of insight into views and experiences of service users and healthcare staff. Further studies are needed to assess and investigate the topic on a national level.

Service user led organisations in mental health today

Abstract Background: Since 1990, health policy in England has stressed the importance of user involvement in shaping and delivering services. Aims: To explore mental health service user-led organisations (ULOs) in England, as they interact with decision-makers to bring about change desired by them with a focus on institutional norms behaviour and specialised knowledge impacting service users’ relationships with services. Method: An ethnography of five ULOs in two provider organisations (NHS Trusts) including observing their meetings and interactions with decision-makers, conducting in-depth interviews and collecting reflective diaries kept by two members of each group. Results: During the study, one group ceased to operate. This was a group which refused to adopt the institutional rules and norms of managerial discourse. The other four groups survived by navigating the changing environment which existed at the time of the study, although often at some cost. Themes of autonomy and leadership were also identified. Conclusion: The current environment is one of the organisational complexity and change and the place of ULOs is an ambiguous one as they strive to maintain autonomy whilst at the same time being an acceptable voice to managers.

Service user governors in mental health foundation trusts: accountability or business as usual?

National Health Foundation Trusts present opportunities for individual mental health service users to be active in the governance of trusts. This is one of a range of mechanisms for patient and public involvement and one which promotes an individual rather than collective approach to involvement.