Using a digital personal recovery resource in routine mental health practice: feasibility, acceptability and outcomes

Abstract

Background

Digital technologies enable the dissemination of multimedia resources to support adults with serious mental illness in their self-management and personal recovery. However, delivery needs to accommodate engagement and accessibility challenges.

Aims

We examined how a digital resource, designed for mental health workers and consumers to use together in session, would be used in routine practice.

Methods

Thirty consumers and their workers participated. The web-based resource, Self-Management And Recovery Technology (SMART), was available to use within and between sessions, for a 6-month period. Workers initiated in-session use where relevant. Feasibility was explored via uptake and usage data; and acceptability and impact via questionnaires. A pre-post design assessed recovery outcomes for consumers and relationship outcomes for consumers and workers.

Results

In participating mental health practitioner-consumer dyads, consumers gave strong acceptability ratings, and reported improved working relationships. However, the resource was typically used in one-third or fewer appointments, with consumers expressing a desire for greater in-session use. Improvements in self-rated personal recovery were not observed, possibly contributed to by low usage.

Conclusions

In-session use was found helpful by consumers but may be constrained by other demands in mental health care delivery: collaborative use may require dedicated staff time or more formal implementation.

Keywords:

• Digital mental health
• digital tools
• tablet computers
• lived experience video
• personal recovery
• psychosis
• community mental health services

Acknowledgements

The SMART research program was supported by a Mental Illness Research Fund Grant (MIRF33), from the Victorian State Government Department of Health and Human Services, Australia. We gratefully acknowledge the contributions of partner services, peer video contributors, software developers, videographer, consumer and practitioner reference groups, and research team members Sue Farnan, Rosalie Frankish, Rebecca Gomo, Katrina Lindblom, Tara Smark, Vanessa von Berg and Friedericke Wahl.

Ethics statement

This research was conducted with the review and approval of Alfred Hospital Ethics Committee (502-14) and Swinburne University Ethics Committee (2015/011).

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 In Australia, the word “consumer” refers to people with lived experience of mental health issues and services

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Department of Health and Human Services, State Government of Victoria (MIRF33).