Recovery-oriented and trauma-informed care for people with mental disorders to promote human rights and quality of mental health care: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND

In several countries, the growing emphasis on human rights and the ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) have highlighted the need for changes in culture, attitudes and practices of mental health services. New approaches, such as recovery-oriented care (ROC) and trauma-informed care (TIC) emphasize the users' needs and experiences and promote autonomy and human rights.

AIMS

To provide an overview of the literature on recovery-oriented care (ROC) and trauma-informed care (TIC) and their relevance to the promotion of human rights and quality of mental health care.

METHOD

We conducted a scoping review by searching the following databases: PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO. We performed a qualitative synthesis of the literature aimed at reviewing: (1) current conceptualisations of recovery in mental health care; (2) recovery-oriented practices in mental health care; (3) current conceptualizations of trauma and TIC in mental health care; (4) trauma-informed practices in mental health care; (5) the relationship between ROC and TIC, with a particular focus on their shared goal of promoting alternatives to coercion, and on trauma-informed and/or recovery oriented alternatives to coercion.

RESULTS

According to prevailing conceptual frameworks, ROC and TIC share many underlying principles and should be regarded as complementary. Both approaches affirm the conceptualization of service users as persons, foster their autonomy and rely on their involvement in designing and monitoring mental health services. Both approaches promote human rights. A wider consensus on conceptual frameworks, tools and methodologies is needed to support ROC and TIC implementation and allow comparison among practices. Recovery-oriented and trauma-informed models of care can contribute to the implementation of non-coercive practices, which show promising results but warrant further empirical study.

CONCLUSIONS

Recovery-oriented and trauma-informed practices and principles may contribute to the shift towards rights-based mental health care and to the implementation and successful uptake of alternatives to coercion. Local and international work aimed to promote and test these approaches may provide a contribution to improving mental health care world-wide. Future research should focus on the outcomes of all involved stakeholders' and include the perspectives of both staff members and service users in different contexts.