TY - JOUR
T1 - Implementing personalisation in integrated mental health teams in England
AU - Hamilton, Sarah
AU - Manthorpe, Jill
AU - Szymczynska, Paulina
AU - Clewett, Naomi
AU - Larsen, John
AU - Pinfold, Vanessa
AU - Tew, Jerry
PY - 2015/8/28
Y1 - 2015/8/28
N2 - This article explores how role boundaries and professional priorities in integrated mental health teams have impacted on the implementation of personalised approaches to social care support. We focus on the use of personal budgets to meet mental health-related social care needs as a key mechanism for personalised care. Drawing on 28 qualitative interviews with mental health practitioners from three local authorities in England undertaken in 2013, we report nurses’, social workers’, and occupational therapists’ attitudes towards, and engagement with, personal budgets. Professional boundaries and competing priorities heavily influenced the extent to which personal budgets were perceived as a legitimate part of their roles. Across different professional groups, a sense emerged that personal budgets should be somebody else’s job. A focus on attention to treatment, stability, and risk management often resulted in low prioritisation of personal budgets and led practitioners to avoid recommending them or to exclude service users from the process as a way to save time. Implications of the dominant medical model and the protection of traditional professional roles for the implementation of new, person-centred models of practice are discussed.
AB - This article explores how role boundaries and professional priorities in integrated mental health teams have impacted on the implementation of personalised approaches to social care support. We focus on the use of personal budgets to meet mental health-related social care needs as a key mechanism for personalised care. Drawing on 28 qualitative interviews with mental health practitioners from three local authorities in England undertaken in 2013, we report nurses’, social workers’, and occupational therapists’ attitudes towards, and engagement with, personal budgets. Professional boundaries and competing priorities heavily influenced the extent to which personal budgets were perceived as a legitimate part of their roles. Across different professional groups, a sense emerged that personal budgets should be somebody else’s job. A focus on attention to treatment, stability, and risk management often resulted in low prioritisation of personal budgets and led practitioners to avoid recommending them or to exclude service users from the process as a way to save time. Implications of the dominant medical model and the protection of traditional professional roles for the implementation of new, person-centred models of practice are discussed.
KW - integrated teams
KW - mental health
KW - personal budgets
KW - personalisation
KW - social care
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84943585748
U2 - 10.3109/13561820.2015.1035777
DO - 10.3109/13561820.2015.1035777
M3 - Article
SN - 1356-1820
VL - 29
SP - 488
EP - 493
JO - Journal of Interprofessional Care
JF - Journal of Interprofessional Care
IS - 5
ER -