Exploring patients' experience of peer-supported open dialogue and standard care following a mental health crisis: qualitative 3-month follow-up study.

Background: Experience of crisis care may vary across different care models.

Aims: To explore the experience of care in standard care and 'open dialogue' (a peer-supported community service focused on open dialogue and involving social networks for adults with a recent mental health crisis) 3 months after a crisis.

Method: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 11 participants (6 received open dialogue; 5 received treatment as usual (TAU)) in a feasibility study of open dialogue and analysed the data using a three-step inductive thematic analysis to identify themes that (a) were frequently endorsed and (b) represented the experiences of all participants.

Results: Four themes emerged: (a) feeling able to rely on and access mental health services; (b) supportive and understanding family and friends; (c) having a choice and a voice; and (d) confusion and making sense of experiences. Generally, there was a divergence in experience across the two care models. Open dialogue participants often felt able to rely on and access services and involve their family and friends in their care. TAU participants described a need to rely on services and difficulty when it was not met, needing family and friends for support and wanting them to be more involved in their care. Some participants across both care models experienced confusion after a crisis and described benefits of sense-making.

Conclusions: Understanding crisis care experiences across different care models can inform service development in crisis and continuing mental healthcare services.