Family Focused Practice in Mental Health Care: An Integrative Review

While mental health services are increasingly encouraged to engage in family-focused practice, it is a nebulous and poorly understood term. The aim of this paper was to examine and synthesize evidence on the concept and scope of family-focused practice in adult and child and youth mental health care settings. An integrative literature review method was used. Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycInfo and Proquest electronic databases were systematically searched forabstracts published in English between 1994-2014. Data were extracted and constant comparative analysis conducted with 40 included articles. Family-focused practice was conceptualised variously depending on who was included in the „family‟, whether the focus was family of origin or family of procreation, and the context of practice. As a finding of the review, six core and inter-related family-focused practices were identified: family care planning andgoal-setting; liaison between families and services; instrumental, emotional and social support; assessment; psychoeducation; and a coordinated system of care between families and services. While family is a troubled concept, „family‟ as defined by its members forms a basis for practice that is oriented to providing a „whole of family‟ approach to care. In order to strengthen familymembers‟ wellbeing and improve their individual and collective outcomes, key principles and practices of family-focused practice are recommended for clinicians and policy makers across mental health settings.

Evidence-based practice: the relevance of systematic reviews.

Aim:
To demonstrate how systematic reviews provide robust evidence to inform clinical decision making in practice.

Background
Systematic reviews collate findings from a number of research studies in order to provide a comprehensive and reliable summary of the best available evidence. The use of systematic reviews to inform practice based decisions has increased as a result of the overwhelming amount of research literature available, poor quality of research evidence and the need to ensure practice is based upon the best available evidence. Systematic reviews are an efficient way of coping with large volumes of data to answer focused research questions. They differ from traditional literature reviews as they adhere to an explicit scientific process. The use of explicit and rigorous methods to identify, appraise and synthesise relevant studies minimises bias and provides a reliable basis for decision making. As a result systematic reviews provide clear evidence on the effectiveness of a healthcare intervention to inform policy and decision making across healthcare systems. An example of how the findings from systematic reviews can provide reliable evidence to inform healthcare decisions will be provided in this presentation1. This will demonstrate how focused clinical questions can be answered by systematic reviews and translated into practice.

Reference:
1. McGaughey J, Alderdice F, Fowler R, Kapila A, Moutray M. (2007) Outreach and Early Warning Systems (EWS) for the prevention of Intensive Care admission admission and death of critically ill adult patients on general hospital wards (REVIEW). The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 3. art no CD005529

Post-trauma: Is evidence based practice a fantasy?

Trauma, bereavement, and loss are universal human experiences. Much has been written about the process that the bereaved go through following the loss of a loved one. Recent events such as 9/11, earthquakes in Turkey, genocides in Rwanda, community conflict in Northern Ireland, and the Asian Tsunami Disaster have drawn unprecedented public attention to the subject of traumatic bereavement. Increasingly, it is recognised that while most people are able to cope with loss generally by eventually restructuring their lives, those bereaved in traumatic circumstance often find it extremely difficult. As a consequence, a plethora of interventions have emerged, however, to-date, little is know about their actual effectiveness in helping the bereaved. With the emphasis of health and welfare professions on evidencebased practice (EBP) greater than ever and a raising awareness of accountability as key element of ethical practice, the call for EBP in traumatic bereavement is compelling. Using examples from work carried out in Northern Ireland, we look at the backdrop of the issues involved, describe some of the most commonly used therapeutic interventions, and explore the possibility of evidence-based practice.

The postmodernist war on evidence-based practice

In this paper, we examine the war of words between those who contend that health care practice, including nursing, should primarily be informed by research (the evidence-based practice movement), and those who argue that there should be no restrictions on the sources of knowledge used by practitioners (the postmodernists). We review the postmodernist interventions of Dave Holmes and his colleagues, observing that the postmodernist style to which they adhere, which includes the use of continental philosophy, metaphors, and acerbic delivery, tends to obscure their substantive arguments. The heated nature of some responses to them has tended to have the same effect. However, the substantive arguments are important. Five main postmodernist charges are identified and discussed. The first argument, that the notion of ‘best evidence’ implies a hierarchical and exclusivist approach to knowledge, is persuasive. However, the contention that this hierarchy is maintained by the combined pressures of capitalism and vested interests within academia and the health services, is less well founded. Nevertheless, postmodernist contentions that the hierarchy embraced by the evidence-based practice movement damages health care because it excludes other forms of evidence that are needed to understand the complexity of care, it marginalizes important aspects of clinical knowledge, and it fails to take account of individuals or their experience, are all seen to be of some merit. However, we do not share the postmodernist conclusion that this adds up to a fascist order. Instead, we characterize evidence-based practice as a necessary but not sufficient component of health care knowledge.

Translating evidence into practice: A shared priority in public health?

Translational and transdisciplinary research is needed to tackle complex public health problems. This article has three aims. Firstly, to determine how academics and non-academics (practitioners, policy makers and community workers) identified with the goals of the UKCRC Centre of Excellence for Public Health in Northern Ireland and how their attitudes varied in terms of knowledge brokerage and translation. Secondly, to map and analyse the network structure of the public health sector and the placement of the Centre within this. Thirdly, to aggregate responses from members of the network by work setting to construct the trans-sectoral network and devise the Root Mean Sum of Squares to determine the quality and potential value of connections across this network.The analysis was based on data collected from 98 individuals who attended the launch of the Centre in June 2008. Analysis of participant expectations and personal goals suggests that the academic members of the network were more likely to expect the work of the Centre to produce new knowledge than non-academics, but less likely to expect the Centre to generate health interventions and influence health policy. Academics were also less strongly oriented than non-academics to knowledge transfer as a personal goal, though more confident that research findings would be diffused beyond the immediate network. A central core of five nodes is crucial to the overall configuration of the regional public health network in Northern Ireland, with the Centre being well placed to exert influence within this. Though the overall network structure is fairly robust, the connections between some component parts of the network - such as academics and the third sector - are unidirectional.Identifying these differences and core network structure is key to translational and transdisciplinary research. Though exemplified in a regional study, these techniques are generalisable and applicable to many networks of interest: public health, interdisciplinary research or organisational involvement and stakeholder linkage.

Fundamental patterns of knowing in nursing: The challenge of evidence-based practice

This article reconsiders the fundamental patterns of knowing in nursing in light of the challenge of narrowempirics in the formof evidence-based practice. Objections to the dominance of evidence-based practice are reviewed, and the reasons for it are examined. It is argued that it is partially the result of weaknesses in the alternative patterns of ethical, personal, and esthetic knowing, the ineffability of which compromises accountability. This ineffability can be countered only by introducing a wider form of empirics than countenanced by evidencebased practice into all patterns of knowing, to demonstrate their salience and to make their use in practice transparent.