Using recovery-focused PROMs in mental health care: what helps and what gets in the way? A scoping review.
Saved in:
| Title: | Using recovery-focused PROMs in mental health care: what helps and what gets in the way? A scoping review. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Zappa, Asha (AUTHOR), Scanlan, Justin Newton (AUTHOR), Honey, Anne (AUTHOR), Hancock, Nicola (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Journal of Mental Health. Feb2026, Vol. 35 Issue 1, p127-139. 13p. |
| Subjects: | Corporate culture, Health services accessibility, Work, Clinical medicine, Medical information storage & retrieval systems, Health literacy, Mental health services, Professional practice, Professional ethics, CINAHL database, Questionnaires, Research evaluation, Culture, Descriptive statistics, Confidence, Goal (Psychology), Systematic reviews, Thematic analysis, Organizational structure, MEDLINE, Information needs, Attitude (Psychology), Convalescence, Attitudes of medical personnel, Psychometrics, Cognition disorders, Health outcome assessment, Mental health personnel, Change, Data analysis software, Psychosocial factors, Access to information, Experiential learning, Psychology information storage & retrieval systems, Time, Employees' workload, Medical practice, Patients' attitudes |
| Abstract: | Background: Recovery-focused person/patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), are important for recovery-oriented services, but workers have been slow to embed them within practice. Little is known about factors that influence workers use of these measures. Aim: To synthesise peer reviewed literature regarding the enablers and barriers mental health workers report to using recovery-focused PROMs in practice. Methods: Five databases were searched. Data were extracted from publications meeting the inclusion criteria, tabulated, and presented graphically. A qualitative thematic analysis was also conducted. Results: Only six of 30 recovery-focused PROMs had any published work reporting staff experiences of using them. Aspects influencing PROM use included: organisational and structural factors; value alignment; tool psychometrics; perceived relevance to practice and people accessing service; whether staff deemed tools to be useful and meaningful, and ease of use and access. Conclusions: More work is needed to address worker needs if recovery-focused tools are to be used routinely to collaboratively support people to explore their own recovery-related strengths and priorities. Both tool specific aspects, and organisational structures, that can support or hinder workers to use these tools in routine and recovery-oriented ways. PRISMA/PROSPERO: The PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) was followed. Prospero does not accept protocols for scoping reviews. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of Mental Health is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Background: Recovery-focused person/patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), are important for recovery-oriented services, but workers have been slow to embed them within practice. Little is known about factors that influence workers use of these measures. Aim: To synthesise peer reviewed literature regarding the enablers and barriers mental health workers report to using recovery-focused PROMs in practice. Methods: Five databases were searched. Data were extracted from publications meeting the inclusion criteria, tabulated, and presented graphically. A qualitative thematic analysis was also conducted. Results: Only six of 30 recovery-focused PROMs had any published work reporting staff experiences of using them. Aspects influencing PROM use included: organisational and structural factors; value alignment; tool psychometrics; perceived relevance to practice and people accessing service; whether staff deemed tools to be useful and meaningful, and ease of use and access. Conclusions: More work is needed to address worker needs if recovery-focused tools are to be used routinely to collaboratively support people to explore their own recovery-related strengths and priorities. Both tool specific aspects, and organisational structures, that can support or hinder workers to use these tools in routine and recovery-oriented ways. PRISMA/PROSPERO: The PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) was followed. Prospero does not accept protocols for scoping reviews. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 09638237 |
| DOI: | 10.1080/09638237.2025.2607985 |
