IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v57y2003i6p1127-1142.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Indicators of empowerment and disempowerment in the subjective evaluation of the psychiatric treatment process by persons with severe and persistent mental illness: a qualitative and quantitative analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Kilian, Reinhold
  • Lindenbach, Iro
  • Löbig, Uta
  • Uhle, Matthias
  • Petscheleit, Andreas
  • Angermeyer, Matthias C.

Abstract

Empowerment and disempowerment is studied in terms of the way persons with long and persistent schizophrenia evaluate their psychiatric outpatient treatment. One hundred persons with the diagnosis of schizophrenia (ICD-10 F 20.0) were interviewed about their perceptions and evaluation of the treatment process by means of problem-focused interviews. Transcribed interviews were subjected to qualitative content analysis. Relationships among the categories of the qualitative content analysis were analyzed by means of a homogeneity analysis. The latent dimension extracted by the homogeneity analysis could be interpreted as a quantitative measure of an empowered or a disempowered perception of the treatment process. As a result of the qualitative content analysis it was found that a majority of participants tend to describe their treatment as reduced to drug treatment and that they tend to notice only positive medication effects rather than mixed medication effects or positive effects of conversation and that they feel helpless or indifferent rather than actively involved in the treatment process. The impact of socio-demographic, clinical, and treatment characteristics on the participants' location on a latent dimension called "empowerment" was examined by means of multiple regression analysis. General life satisfaction, negative symptoms and getting depot medication were positively associated with a more disempowered perception of the treatment process whereas positive symptoms, getting antidepressant medication and being treated in an outpatient clinic instead of a private practice were associated with a more empowered perception.

Suggested Citation

  • Kilian, Reinhold & Lindenbach, Iro & Löbig, Uta & Uhle, Matthias & Petscheleit, Andreas & Angermeyer, Matthias C., 2003. "Indicators of empowerment and disempowerment in the subjective evaluation of the psychiatric treatment process by persons with severe and persistent mental illness: a qualitative and quantitative anal," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 57(6), pages 1127-1142, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:57:y:2003:i:6:p:1127-1142
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(02)00490-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ulrike Röger & Alfred Rütten & Annika Frahsa & Karim Abu-Omar & Antony Morgan, 2011. "Differences in individual empowerment outcomes of socially disadvantaged women: effects of mode of participation and structural changes in a physical activity promotion program," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 56(5), pages 465-473, October.
    2. Hans Arvidsson & Elisabeth Olin & Jennifer Strand & Inga Tidefors, 2014. "Effects of the Two-Way Communication Checklist (2-COM): A one-year cluster randomized study in a group of severely mentally ill persons," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 60(1), pages 95-102, February.
    3. Chiara Salvatore & Gregor Wolbring, 2021. "Children and Youth Environmental Action: The Case of Children and Youth with Disabilities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-27, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:57:y:2003:i:6:p:1127-1142. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.