A systematic review of policy and clinical guidelines on positive risk management.
Saved in:
| Title: | A systematic review of policy and clinical guidelines on positive risk management. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Just, Daniela, Tai, Sara, Palmier-Claus, Jasper |
| Source: | Journal of Mental Health. Feb2023, Vol. 32 Issue 1, p329-340. 12p. 2 Diagrams, 1 Chart, 1 Graph. |
| Subjects: | Health policy, Medical protocols, National health services, Descriptive statistics, Risk management in business, Thematic analysis, Data analysis software |
| Abstract: | National policies and guidelines advocate that mental health practitioners employ positive risk management in clinical practice. However, there is currently a lack of clear guidance and definitions around this technique. Policy reviews can clarify complex issues by qualitatively synthesising common themes in the literature. To review and thematically analyse national policy and guidelines on positive risk management to understand how it is conceptualised and defined. The authors completed a systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42019122322) of grey literature databases (NICE, NHS England, UK Government) to identify policies and guidelines published between 1980 and April 2019. They analysed the results using thematic analysis. The authors screened 4999 documents, identifying 7 eligible policies and 19 guidelines. Qualitative synthesis resulted in three main themes: i) the conflicting aims of positive risk management; ii) conditional positive risk management; and iii) responsible positive risk management. Analysis highlighted discrepancies and tensions in the conceptualisation of positive risk management both within and between policies. Documents described positive risk management in different and contradictory terms, making it challenging to identify what it is, when it should be employed, and by whom. Five policies offered only very limited definitions of positive risk management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of Mental Health is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | National policies and guidelines advocate that mental health practitioners employ positive risk management in clinical practice. However, there is currently a lack of clear guidance and definitions around this technique. Policy reviews can clarify complex issues by qualitatively synthesising common themes in the literature. To review and thematically analyse national policy and guidelines on positive risk management to understand how it is conceptualised and defined. The authors completed a systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42019122322) of grey literature databases (NICE, NHS England, UK Government) to identify policies and guidelines published between 1980 and April 2019. They analysed the results using thematic analysis. The authors screened 4999 documents, identifying 7 eligible policies and 19 guidelines. Qualitative synthesis resulted in three main themes: i) the conflicting aims of positive risk management; ii) conditional positive risk management; and iii) responsible positive risk management. Analysis highlighted discrepancies and tensions in the conceptualisation of positive risk management both within and between policies. Documents described positive risk management in different and contradictory terms, making it challenging to identify what it is, when it should be employed, and by whom. Five policies offered only very limited definitions of positive risk management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 09638237 |
| DOI: | 10.1080/09638237.2021.1922643 |
