Hostname: page-component-68945f75b7-z7ghp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-06T10:16:11.452Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Providing Psychoeducational Family Intervention for Bipolar I Patients in the Real-world Study: Difficulties and Benefits for Mental Health Professionals.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 April 2020

V. Del Vecchio
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, University of Naples SUN, Naples, Italy
M. Luciano
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, University of Naples SUN, Naples, Italy
C. De Rosa
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, University of Naples SUN, Naples, Italy
G. Sampogna
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, University of Naples SUN, Naples, Italy
A. Fiorillo
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, University of Naples SUN, Naples, Italy

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Introduction

Although many international guidelines emphasize the need to provide psychoeducational family intervention (PFI) together with pharmacological treatments for optimal management of bipolar I patients, this intervention is not routinely provided in mental health centres.

Objectives

The Department of Psychiatry of the University of Naples SUN has promoted a study to identify obstacles for the implementation of the PFI in the routine care.

Aims

To identify mental health professionals’ benefits and difficulties in the implementation of PFI.

Methods

The Family Intervention Schedule was administered to mental health professionals at baseline, at T1, T2, T3, T4, T5 supervision meetings.

Results

Twenty-two mental health professionals were recruited, 45% were psychiatrists, with a mean age of 37.4(±7.3). The participants had been working in psychiatry for a mean of 9.1 (±6.5) years and the majority of them stated to be routinely in contact with patients and their relatives. At the beginning of the study, the highest levels of difficulties regarded:1)the integration of PFI with other work responsibilities;2)the lack of time to run the intervention;3)the identification of suitable families. Among benefits, participants reported an increased feeling of confidence in relation to their work (p<.05) and an improvement in the relationships with the service users’ families (p<.01). Difficulties tended to decrease over time, being absent at the end of the protocol.

Conclusions

Although mental health professionals recognize that PFI has a positive impact on their work, many organizational obstacles prevent its routine use. A possible solution may be the promotion of peer-led PFIs, as already done by the US NAMI.

Type
Article: 0416
Copyright
Copyright © European Psychiatric Association 2015
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.