Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Open Dialogue and its Relevance to the NHS: Opinions of NHS Staff and Service Users

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Community Mental Health Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Open Dialogue is a model of mental health services that originated in Finland and has since, been taken up in trial teams worldwide. As this is a relatively unknown approach in the UK, it is important to tentatively explore perspectives of NHS staff and service-users. Sixty-one Open Dialogue conference attendees, both staff and service-users, were recruited for this study. A feedback questionnaire was administered to determine the extent to which they believed the key tenets of Open Dialogue were important to service user care, and the extent to which they existed within current NHS services. Analysis of data demonstrated a strong consensus on the importance of the key principles of Open Dialogue for mental health care and also moderate disagreement that these principles exist within current NHS service provision. The Open Dialogue principles may offer a useful framework in order to develop services in a clinically meaningful way.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allot, P., Loganathan, L., & Fulford, K. W. M. (2002). Discovering hope for recovery. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health, 21(3), 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, H. (1990). Then and now: From knowing to not-knowing. Contemporary Family Therapy Journal, 12, 193–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andreasen, R., Oades, L., & Caputi, P. (2003). The experience of recovery from schizophrenia: Towards an empirically validated stage model. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 37, 584–594.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borg, M., Karlsson, B., Tondora, J., & Davidson, L. (2009). Implementing person-centered care in psychiatric rehabilitation: What does this involve? Israel Journal of Psychiatry and Related Sciences, 46(2), 84–93.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, P. (2005). From little acorns—The mental health service user movement is a sample chapter from beyond the water towers. London: The Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chadwick, P. (1997). Recovery from psychosis: Learning more from patients. Journal of Mental Health, 6(6), 577–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holma, J., & Aaltonen, J. (1998). Narrative understanding in acute psychosis. Contempory Family Therapy, 20, 253–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, V. (2012). Developing Open Dialogue. from http://www.developingopendialogue.com/about.html.

  • Lloyd-Evans, B., Johnson, S., Slade, Mike, Barrett, B., Byford, S., Gilburt, H., & Thornicroft, G. (2010). In-patient alternatives to traditional mental health acute inpatient care. London: NIHR.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, S. (2000). Clinical risk management—A clinical tool and practitioner manual. London: The Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health.

    Google Scholar 

  • NICE. (2014). Psychosis and schizophrenia in adults: Treatment and management. London: National Institute of Clinical Excellence.

    Google Scholar 

  • Overall, J., & Gorham, D. (1962). The brief psychiatric rating scale (BPRS). Psychological Reports, 10, 799–812.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitt, L., Kilbride, M., Nothard, S., Welford, M., & Morrison, A. P. (2007). Researching recovery from psychosis: A user-led project. Psychiatry Bulletin, 31, 55–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Razzaque., (2014). Introduction to peer-supported open dialogue. London: North East London Foundation Trust.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scandinavian Network (2011). www.scandinaviannetwork.com.

  • Seikkula, J. (2002). Open dialogues with good and poor outcomes for psychotic crises: Examples from families with violence. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 28(3), 263–274.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Seikkula, J., Aaltonen, J., Alakare, B., Haarakangas, K., Keranen, J., & Lehtinen, K. (2006). Five year experience of first episode nonaffective psychosis in open-dialogue approach: Treatment principles, follow-up outcomes, and two case studies. Psychotherapy Research, 16(02), 214–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seikkula, J., Aaltonen, J., Rasinkangas, A., Alakare, B., Holma, J., & Lehtinen, K. (2003a). Open dialogue approach: Treatment principles and preliminary results of a Two-year follow-up on first episode schizophrenia. Ethical and Human Sciences and Services, 5, 163–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seikkula, J., Alakare, B., & Aaltonen, J. (2001a). Open dialogue in psychosis I: An introduction and case illustration. Journal of Constructivisit Psychology, 14, 247–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seikkula, J., Alakare, B., & Aaltonen, J. (2001b). Open dialogue in psychosis II: A comparison of good and poor outcome cases. Journal of Constructivisit Psychology, 14, 267–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seikkula, J., Alakare, B., Aaltonen, J., Holma, J., Rasinkangas, A., & Lehtinen, V. (2003b). Open dialogue approach: Treatment priciples and preliminary results of a two-year follow-up on first episode psychosis. Ethical and Human Sciences and Services, 5(3), 163–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seikkula, J., & Olsen, M. (2003). The open dialogue approach to acute psycholosis: Its poetics and micropolitics. Family Processes, 42(3), 403–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silverstein, S. M., & Bellack, A. S. (2008). A scientific agenda for the concept of recovery as it applies to schizophrenia. Clinical Psychology Review, 28(7), 1108–1124.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Szasz, T. (2010). Psychiatry, anti-psychiatry, critical psychiatry: What do these terms mean? Philosophy, Psychiatry & Psychology, 17(3), 229–232.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lisa Wood.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Razzaque, R., Wood, L. Open Dialogue and its Relevance to the NHS: Opinions of NHS Staff and Service Users. Community Ment Health J 51, 931–938 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10597-015-9849-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10597-015-9849-5

Keywords

Navigation