Cited by 178Mental Health and Patient InvolvementPsychiatric care and mental health servicesMental Health Treatment and Access

Mental health service users' experiences of mental health care: an integrative literature review

Open access
Newman, D., O'Reilly, P., Lee, S. H., Kennedy, C.·2015·Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing

Abstract

Accessible summary: A number of studies have highlighted issues around the relationship between service users and providers. The recovery model is predominant in mental health as is the recognition of the importance of person‐centred practice. The authors completed an in‐depth search of the literature to answer the question: What are service users' experiences of the mental health service? Three key themes emerged: acknowledging a mental health problem and seeking help; building relationships through participation in care; and working towards continuity of care. The review adds to the current body of knowledge by providing greater detail into the importance of relationships between service users and providers and how these may impact on the delivery of care in the mental health service. The overarching theme that emerged was the importance of the relationship between the service user and provider as a basis for interaction and support. This review has specific implications for mental health nursing. Despite the recognition made in policy documents for change, issues with stigma, poor attitudes and communication persist. There is a need for a fundamental shift in the provider–service user relationship to facilitate true service‐user engagement in their care. The aim of this integrative literature review was to identify mental health service users' experiences of services. The rationale for this review was based on the growing emphasis and requirements for health services to deliver care and support, which recognizes the preferences of individuals. Contemporary models of mental health care strive to promote inclusion and empowerment. This review seeks to add to our current understanding of how service users experience care and support in order to determine to what extent the principles of contemporary models of mental health care are embedded in practice. A robust search of W eb of S cience, the C ochrane D atabase, S cience D irect, EBSCO host ( A cademic S earch C omplete, MEDLINE , CINAHL P lus F ull‐ T ext), P syc INFO , P syc ARTICLES , S ocial S ciences F ull T ext and the U nited K ingdom and I reland R eference C entre for data published between 1 January 2008 and 31 December 2012 was completed. The initial search retrieved 272 609 papers. The authors used a staged approach and the application of predetermined inclusion/exclusion criteria, thus the numbers of papers for inclusion were reduced to 34. Data extraction, quality assessment and thematic analysis were completed for the included studies. Satisfaction with the mental health service was moderately good. However, accessing services could be difficult because of a lack of knowledge and the stigma surrounding mental health. Large surveys document moderate satisfaction ratings; however, feelings of fear regarding how services function and the lack of treatment choice remain. The main finding from this review is while people may express satisfaction with mental health services, there are still issues around three main themes: acknowledging a mental health problem and seeking help; building relationship through participation and care; and working towards continuity of care. Elements of the recovery model appear to be lacking in relation to user involvement, empowerment and decision making. There is a need for a fundamental shift in the context of the provider–service user relationship to fully facilitate service users' engagement in their care.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jpm.12202

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Newman, D., O'Reilly, P., Lee, S. H., & Kennedy, C.
Affiliations
  • University of Limerick (IE)
  • Department of Nursing and Midwifery University of Limerick Limerick Ireland
Venue
Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-02-24
Volume
22
Issue
3
Pages
171-182
ISSN
  • 1351-0126 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2850
OpenAlex
W1563164213
Cited by
178
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 3
FWCI
3.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • BIBSYS Brage (BIBSYS (Norway)) (submittedVersion)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Open Access Institutional Repository at Robert Gordon University (Robert Gordon University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mental Health and Patient Involvement
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
person-centred care, recovery model, continuity of care, service user engagement, help-seeking, mental health stigma, psychiatric nursing, service satisfaction, treatment selection, empowerment
MeSH terms
Humans, Mental Health Services, Patient Acceptance of Health Care

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review