Volume 13, Issue 4 pp. 914-921
ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Barriers and facilitators to “moving on” from early intervention in psychosis services

Sarah Woodward

Sarah Woodward

Division of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK

Search for more papers by this author
Sandra Bucci

Sandra Bucci

Division of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK

Search for more papers by this author
Dawn Edge

Dawn Edge

Division of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK

Search for more papers by this author
Katherine Berry

Corresponding Author

Katherine Berry

Division of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK

Correspondence

Dr Katherine Berry, Division of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, 2nd Floor, Zochonis Building, Brunswick Street, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 27 July 2018
Citations: 9

Abstract

Aim

Transition from early intervention in psychosis services (EIPS) to ongoing care can be challenging for staff and service users. This study aims to explore staff views of the barriers and facilitators to transition from EIPS.

Methods

Eighteen EIPS staff were interviewed about their experiences of discharge processes and interviews were analysed thematically.

Results

Four themes were identified: (1) “nowhere to go”: illustrated how service users remained in EIPS because other teams lacked capacity to take them; (2) “collaboration between agencies” highlights the challenges of working across boundaries; (3) “therapeutic relationships”: reflects the loss service users and staff experienced at discharge; (4) “advanced planning” relates to the necessity for advanced planning and service user empowerment to facilitate the discharge process.

Conclusions

This is the first in-depth exploration of EIPS staff views on discharge processes. To ensure seamless transitions throughout care pathways, services need better inter-agency collaboration and more adequate preparation for transition.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.