Beneficial effects of peer support in psychiatric hospitals. A critical reflection on the results of a qualitative interview and focus group study

Abstract

Background: The implementation of peer support work in psychiatric hospitals is a relatively recent development. Consequently, the effects of peer support work on mental health professionals, patients and peer support workers (PSWs) are mostly unknown.

Aims: To explore the beneficial effects of peer support work in detail and to reflect critically on potential sources of misunderstanding.

Method: (1) Nine open-ended, semi-structured interviews with PSWs and (2) five focus groups with mental health professionals plus one focus group with PSWs. The data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis.

Results: Our data show various beneficial effects on patients, such as the themes “less professional distance,” “more time for one-on-one attendance” and “a role model for recovery.” Themes that emerged for mental health professionals were, amongst others, “adding a new perspective,” “improved continuity in treatment offers” and “preserving a respectful tone in meetings.”

Conclusions: It is necessary to minimize the risk of role confusion to achieve the beneficial potential of peer support work. A thorough education on what peer support work can and cannot deliver is essential and could help to foster its successful implementation.

Keywords:

• Peer support work
• adult psychiatry
• implementation
• qualitative empirical research

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the participating PSWs for their time and trust, and the mental health professionals of the hosting hospitals for their support and willingness to participate in this study. They thank Marco Knoll and Anita von Lünen for their help in conducting this study. They also thank the Regional Association of Westphalia-Lippe (LWL) and the LWL Hospital Department (Prof. Dr Meinolf Noeker, T. Profazi) for their help in realizing this study and for the financial funding. Finally, they thank all members of the LWL working group “Trialogue” for their continuous support.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.