Skip to main content

Table 5 Qualitative research findings relating to consumer outcomes and experiences of service

From: A systematic review of service models and evidence relating to the clinically operated community-based residential mental health rehabilitation for adults with severe and persisting mental illness in Australia

Service type

Service name

Research focus

Studies reporting

Finding(s)

(n/N)d

Quality

Source(s)

Good

Fair

Poor

Community-Based Residential Care

CCUa

Consumer perspective

1/2

–

–

1

[24]b

â–ª 8-year follow-up post service entry identified themes of disempowerment, instability in accommodation and social networks, issues with continuity of care, and loss were identified.

Community Residences

1/2

–

–

1

[23]b

â–ª 6-year follow-up found residents describing increased freedom, but also difficulties enhancing social networks, absence of new goals and lack of expectation of change in life circumstances.

1/1

–

–

1

[42]

â–ª Residents express preference for community living to long-term inpatient care in the initial period following transfer.

Staff perspective

1/1

–

–

1

[42]

▪ Staff identify the process of new skill acquisition for formally de-institutionalised residents as ‘not easy’ and acknowledged slow but continual progress, as well as the reducing support needs for residents over time.

Transitional Residential Rehabilitation

CCU

Consumer perspective

4/4

2

–

2

[25, 39, 40, 58]

â–ª The services are viewed favourably by consumers entering and engaging with them, particularly in comparison to inpatient psychiatric care. Positive aspects of the care environment include increased opportunity for independence and activity engagement and availability of caring staff.

2/4

1

–

1

[40, 58]

â–ª Consumers understand the transitional and rehabilitation foci of the service. Additionally, they view it as providing an environment facilitating social interaction, friendship and mutual support between co-residents.

1/4

1

–

–

[40]

â–ª Content analysis found that most consumers had been involved in the decision to come to the CCU, and the most common reason for engagement was accommodation instability rather than the opportunity to engage in rehabilitation.

1/4

1

–

–

[39]

â–ª Favourable expectations of the increased availability of Peer Support Workers at the study sites trialling an Integrated Staffing Model.

Staff perspective

3/3

2

1

–

[30, 45, 48]

â–ª Staff understandings of these services are consistent with the designated service models.

1/3

–

1

–

[30]c

▪ Content domains of the recovery concept identified as: a shared vision of recovery as ‘a continuous journey’; the importance of clinicians ‘promoting hope’, shifting emphasis from rehabilitation to ‘promoting autonomy and self-determination’, the centrality of ‘meaningful engagement and collaborative partnerships’, ‘holistic and personalised care’, and ‘community participation and citizenship’.

1/3

1

–

–

[45]

▪ Four themes relating to the staff concept of the CCU were identified: ‘rehabilitation is different to treatment’, a ‘positive transitional space’, ‘they (consumers) have to be ready to engage’, and ‘recovery is central to rehabilitation practice’.

â–ª Burnout and external pressure from the broader mental health system limit the ability to deliver recovery-oriented rehabilitation.

1/3

1

–

–

[48]

▪ Commencing staff have positive expectations of the integration of peer support with clinical staff under the Integrated Staffing Model; anticipating the CCU to be ‘a place of mutual learning and co-development’, ‘a temporary and transitional place’, and provide a simulacra of community living.

Family perspective

1/1

–

–

1

[58]

â–ª Service viewed favourably in the single family member perspective presented.

CRCa

Multiple stakeholder perspectives

1/1

–

–

1

[31]

â–ª Consumers understand the transitional and rehabilitation foci of the service.

â–ª Staff understanding of the service is consistent with the designated service models.

HHa

Multiple stakeholder perspectives

1/1

–

–

1

[33]

â–ª The service was viewed favourably by consumers and their families.

  1. aCommunity Care Unit (CCU), Community Rehabilitation Centre (CRC), Hawthorn House (HH).
  2. bData from mixed methods study with a primary quantitative emphasis.
  3. cExploratory study with staff providing the majority stakeholder perspective.
  4. dThe denominator is the number of studies undertaken under the specified Service Name; the numerator is the subset of studies undertaken with the relevant Research Focus