JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

Recovery colleges provide users of mental health services with self-management and coping skills, along with actions to promote social inclusion and reduce stigma. Research shows that recovery principles in mental health have the potential to improve services, but that these principles are poorly implemented. The challenge is to make the potential partnership come true, by building trust, by overcoming ideological barriers, and managing resistance to change among mental health professionals and their organisations.

Objective:

The study addresses this challenge by analysing and comparing two recovery activities that differ in their formal relationship with the mental health service. It reports their perceived value assessed by users and psychiatry staff views on the activities and the potential for collaboration.

Methods:

The design is an explanatory comparative case study. The cases are from two countries, one embedded in a mental health service, and the other a free-standing organisation. Thick descriptions of the cases were based on document analysis and stakeholder interviews, subjected to content analysis. A “strategic change management model” guided data collection and analysis. Empirical patterns demonstrating the character and interrelations of the context, content, process and outcome were identified in the case descriptions, forming tentative explanations to benefits and challenges observed.

Results:

The were few differences between the two sites. The sharing of experiences with peers created a sense of belonging, knowledge and practical skills, i.a. useful methods to set limits in life. Participants experienced new roles and behaviours which was empowering and the decreased feeling of stigma. A meeting place for social activities and low-threshold services was particularly important. Mental health professionals had a positive image of the recovery colleges but were not well-informed about their activities. Few saw the college as an activity which could complement their professional services, and there was no indication of impacts on their clinical practice.

Conclusions:

The impact of recovery colleges on mental health professionals and their practice seems to be mostly related to clinician participation in recovery colleges and the co-production of activities and less dependent on the location of the college, either inside or outside a mental health service. Clinical Trial: N/A.