Remote Care for Caregivers of People With Psychosis: Mixed Methods Pilot Study

• Main Authors: Romm, Kristin Lie, Nilsen, Liv, Gjermundsen, Kristine, Holter, Marit, Fjell, Anne, Melle, Ingrid, Repål, Arne, Lobban, Fiona
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: JMIR Publications 2020-07-01
• Series: JMIR Mental Health
• Online Access: http://mental.jmir.org/2020/7/e19497/

BackgroundA reduced availability of resources has hampered the implementation of family work in psychosis. Web-based support programs have the potential to increase access to high-quality, standardized resources. This pilot study tested the Norwegian version of the Relatives Education and Coping Toolkit (REACT), a web-based United Kingdom National Health Service program in combination with phone-based support by trained family therapists. ObjectiveWe investigated how the program was perceived by its users and identified the facilitators and barriers to its clinical implementation. MethodsRelatives of people with psychosis were offered access to REACT and to weekly family therapist support (with 1 of 2 trained family therapists) for 26 weeks. Level of distress and level of expressed emotion data were collected at baseline and after 26 weeks using the Family Questionnaire and the Relatives Stress Scale. Both family therapists and a subset of the relatives were interviewed about their experiences after completing the program. ResultsDuring the program, relatives (n=19) had a median of 8 (range 4-11) consultations with the family therapists. Postintervention, there was a significant reduction in stress and in expressed emotions in the relatives of people with psychosis. Interviews with the relatives (n=7) and the family therapists (n=2) indicated the following themes as important—the intervention turned knowledge into action; the intervention strengthened the feeling of being involved and taken seriously by the health services; and management support and the ability for self-referral were important, while lack of reimbursement and clinician resistance to technology were barriers to implementation. ConclusionsThe service was found to offer a valued clinical benefit; however, strategies that aim to engage clinicians and increase organizational support toward new technology need to be developed.