“Everything is so relaxed and personal” – The construction of helpful relationships in individual placement and support

To identify underlying patterns in the alliance literature, an empirical review of the many existing studies that relate alliance to outcome was conducted. After an exhaustive literature review, the data from 79 studies (58 published, 21 unpublished) were aggregated using meta-analytic procedures. The results of the meta-analysis indicate that the overall relation of therapeutic alliance with outcome is moderate, but consistent, regardless of many of the variables that have been posited to influence this relationship. For patient, therapist, and observer ratings, the various alliance scales have adequate reliability. Across most alliance scales, there seems to be no difference in the ability of raters to predict outcome. Moreover, the relation of alliance and outcome does not appear to be influenced by other moderator variables, such as the type of outcome measure used in the study, the type of outcome rater, the time of alliance assessment, the type of alliance rater, the type of treatment provided, or the publication status of the study.

This report based on research interviews conducted with persons struggling to recover from prolonged psychiatric disorders suggests that the rediscovery and reconstruction of an enduring sense of the self as an active and responsible agent provides an important aspect of improvement. This process of developing a functional sense of self in the midst of persisting psychotic symptoms and dysfunction is described, and its implications for understanding severe mental illness and processes of change are discussed. It is suggested that viewing the development of a dynamic sense of self as central to the improvement process provides a coherent thread which ties together diverse research findings concerning factors influencing course and outcome of illness. It is also suggested that for treatment and rehabilitation to elicit and foster a more functional sense of self, models of improvement will need to allow for, and encourage, a more active and collaborative role for the person with the disorder.

Background Two discourses exist in mental health research and practice. The first focuses on the limitations associated with disability arising from mental disorder. The second focuses on the possibilities for living well with mental health problems. Discussion This article was prompted by a review to inform disability policy. We identify seven findings from this review: recovery is best judged by experts or using standardised assessment; few people with mental health problems recover; if a person no longer meets criteria for a mental illness, they are in remission; diagnosis is a robust basis for characterising groups and predicting need; treatment and other supports are important factors for improving outcome; the barriers to receiving effective treatment are availability, financing and client awareness; and the impact of mental illness, in particular schizophrenia, is entirely negative. We selectively review a wider range of evidence which challenge these findings, including the changing understanding of recovery, national mental health policies, systematic review methodology and undertainty, epidemiological evidence about recovery rates, reasoning biased due to assumptions about mental illness being an illness like any other, the contested nature of schizophrenia, the social construction of diagnoses, alternative explanations for psychosis experiences including the role of trauma, diagnostic over-shadowing, stigma, the technological paradigm, the treatment gap, social determinants of mental ill-health, the prevalence of voice-hearing in the general population, and the sometimes positive impact of psychosis experience in relation to perspective and purpose. Conclusion We propose an alternative seven messages which are both empirically defensible and more helpful to mental health stakeholders: Recovery is best judged by the person living with the experience; Many people with mental health problems recover; If a person no longer meets criteria for a mental illness, they are not ill; Diagnosis is not a robust foundation; Treatment is one route among many to recovery; Some people choose not to use mental health services; and the impact of mental health problems is mixed.