Elsevier

The Lancet Psychiatry

Volume 5, Issue 9, September 2018, Pages 747-764
The Lancet Psychiatry

Review
Experiencing mental health diagnosis: a systematic review of service user, clinician, and carer perspectives across clinical settings

https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(18)30095-6Get rights and content

Summary

Receiving a mental health diagnosis can be pivotal for service users, and it has been described in both positive and negative terms. What influences service-user experience of the diagnostic process is unclear; consequently, clinicians report uncertainty regarding best practice. This Review aims to understand and inform diagnostic practice through a comprehensive synthesis of qualitative data on views and experiences from key stakeholders (service users, clinicians, carers, and family). We searched five databases and identified 78 papers for inclusion, originating from 13 countries and including 2228 participants. Eligible papers were assessed for quality, and data were coded and then developed into themes, which generated a model representing factors to consider for clinicians conveying, and individuals receiving, mental health diagnoses. Themes included disclosure, information provision, collaboration, timing, stigma, and functional value of diagnosis for recovery. Variations between different stakeholders and clinical contexts are explored. Findings support an individualised, collaborative, and holistic approach to mental health diagnosis.

Introduction

Receiving a formal diagnosis can have considerable impact.1 It can help service users to understand their experiences; provide a sense of relief, control, and containment; offer hope for recovery; improve relationships with services; and reduce uncertainty.2, 3, 4 Nonetheless, diagnosis can have unintended consequences, increasing individual and societal burden. These consequences include feelings of hopelessness, disempowerment, and frustration; stigma and discrimination; exacerbated symptoms; and disengagement from services.5, 6, 7

Qualitative research designs most appropriately capture people's views and experiences.8 Evidence suggests that the impact of diagnosis depends on various factors, including service delivery. For example, diagnosis was experienced negatively when individuals felt that they received insufficient information from clinicians.4 Conversely, when people felt knowledgable about their diagnosis, it could foster a sense of control, meaning, and hope.6 The experience is also affected by the method of communication (eg, a letter vs face to face), time taken to decide and disclose a diagnosis, and whether diagnosis is framed as enduring or malleable.3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11

Previous studies that considered service-user experience of mental health diagnosis have focused on a single diagnosis, setting, or stage of the process (eg, disclosure), which limits generalisability. Studies typically explore isolated viewpoints of service users, clinicians, carers, or family. Understanding the process of diagnosis from the perspective of a single stakeholder has restricted usefulness for guiding service provision, which must be implemented at individual, service, and organisational levels. We identified one previous review, but it was limited to whether service users received the information they desired.12 To our knowledge, no published reviews have yet synthesised data on the entire diagnostic process or included the views of carers and family.

This Review aims to incorporate the views of all key stakeholders, throughout the diagnostic process, across mental health conditions. This broad scope offers opportunity to gain a comprehensive and widely applicable understanding of the factors that influence service-user experience, through which we seek to reveal nuanced consideration of the experiential similarities and differences across contexts, such as diagnosis and service setting. This understanding will support the diagnostic process to improve service-user experience and outcomes. Our Review is timely, considering the upcoming release of the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11), which includes a chapter on mental and behavioural disorders.13 Clinicians have reported uncertainty regarding best practice for the diagnostic process, resulting in discomfort and hesitance in implementing diagnostic manuals.14, 15, 16, 17, 18 We aim to offer practical guidance for clinicians. This Review also seeks to inform service users, as well as carers and family, how to navigate the diagnostic process and support participation of all involved.19

Section snippets

Search strategy and selection criteria

We searched PsychINFO, Embase, MEDLINE, and CINAHL from inception to July 20, 2017 (initial search was done in October, 2016, and updated in July, 2017). Our search strategy was as follows: (“experienc* ADJ5 diagno*” or “perspective* ADJ5 diagno*” or “view* ADJ5 diagno*” or “perce* ADJ5 diagno*” or “communicat* ADJ5 diagno*” or “receiv* ADJ5 diagno*” or “deliver* ADJ5 diagno*” or “giv* ADJ5 diagno*” or “process* ADJ5 diagno*” or “news ADJ5 diagno*” or “inform* ADJ5 diagno*” or “disclos* ADJ5

Information extraction

Two reviewers (AP and JR) extracted data. A pre-piloted table was used to extract demographic and methodological information (table). We assessed study quality using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme qualitative assessment checklist,85 supplemented with narrative appraisal within which we considered alternative reporting checklists (eg, consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research [COREQ]).86 Three reviewers (AP, JR, and DB) assigned quantified quality scores (table). NVivo

Thematic synthesis

Thematic synthesis involved the development of descriptive and analytical themes, going beyond initial coding by accounting for transferability to different contexts, relevancy to the research objectives, and frequency of data. Themes were combined into a model representing groups of factors that influence service-user experience of diagnosis. To examine variance across context, we compared themes of papers focused on different stakeholders, diagnoses, service settings, countries, time periods,

Studies and participants included in the systematic review

Our searches of databases and other sources yielded 18 104 results, of which we screened 533 full-text articles for eligibility (figure 1). We included 67 studies (reported in 78 papers) in thematic synthesis (table). Total sample size was 2228 (mean 33 [SD 44]; median 19 [IQR 10–45]). Studies were done in two middle-income and 11 high-income countries: the UK (21), the USA (17), Australia (13), Canada (five), the Netherlands (two), Brazil (two), Sweden (one), New Zealand (one), Latvia (one),

Drivers of diagnosis

Whether decisions were driven by service-user need was a major theme contributing to a diagnosis being experienced as accurate and validating. Some service users felt that diagnoses were instead driven by political motives such as power and control; business, financial, and resource affairs (eg, treatment costs); or clinician fears of causing harm (eg, damaging therapeutic relationships). Clinicians reported feeling pressured by these issues during diagnostic decision making.

Comprehensiveness and quality of the diagnostic assessment

Service users found

Disclosure

This theme encompassed the most codes (figure 2). Disclosure was frequently described as a pivotal moment for service users. Clinicians described an internal struggle or dilemma, whereby they were unsure whether disclosure was beneficial. Most clinicians felt that service users had a right to know their diagnosis, while simultaneously fearing potential harm. Although sometimes experienced negatively, service users generally reported preference for disclosure, giving relief, validating their

Functional value of diagnosis

Service users experienced diagnosis more positively when it was offered as a tool for recovery, leading to appropriate treatment. It was considered most helpful when used to guide care in consideration with service-user preference and other factors (eg, previous treatment experiences); relying solely on diagnosis was considered to be negligent. Similarly, service users believed that diagnosis should not be a prerequisite to accessing services. Others felt that their diagnosis was meaningless

Collaborative and therapeutic relationships

Across all stages of the diagnostic process, service users felt respected when clinicians were empathetic, caring, and attuned to individual needs. Collaboration was preferred, although such practice was infrequently reported. Many service users described their diagnosing clinician as an authoritarian expert, causing them to feel uninvolved and unheard, and potentially to reject the diagnosis. Service users found diagnostic decision making more positive and credible when their expertise and

Stigma, discrimination, and culture

This theme accumulated the largest number of codes among non-service-related factors. Service users found the diagnostic process damaging when it resulted in stigma. Many reported negative social side-effects of diagnosis, including hostility, exclusion, and marginalisation by others. Some felt that they were no longer seen as a person, but as a diagnosis to be feared or avoided. Fear of stigma alone could create anxiety about being diagnosed and cause isolation. When a service user's culture

Service users' previous experiences and help seeking

Many service users had preconceptions of diagnoses, developed from previous experiences. If these were negative (eg, associated with poor outcome through negative familial experiences of mental health conditions), the diagnostic process could be particularly anxiety provoking. Many also developed theories about the cause of their symptoms. If these did not correspond with explanations offered by services (eg, believing symptoms were physical rather than psychological), the experience was

Subgroup analysis

We considered similarities and differences between stakeholders in the overall analysis. An overarching finding was that, despite uncertainty, clinicians aimed to provide the best care, yet the care provided was sometimes found to be unhelpful or harmful by service users. There are few papers on carer or family views for comparison, although a common theme among this group was feeling excluded from the process.

Analyses revealed substantial similarity between diagnoses, albeit with some

Discussion

Understanding the factors influencing service-user experience of diagnosis was limited by research focused on specific diagnoses, settings, or stages of the diagnostic process. Our synthesis identifies that how diagnoses are decided, communicated, and used by services is important. Disclosure, information provision, collaboration, timing, and functional value for recovery were among the most prominent themes. External and internal factors were found to further influence service-user experience

References (95)

  • ZQ Al-Busaidi

    Qualitative research and its uses in health care

    Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J

    (2008)
  • RA Clafferty et al.

    Conspiracy of silence? Telling patients with schizophrenia their diagnosis

    Psychiatric Bull

    (2001)
  • AC Milton et al.

    Information giving challenges and support strategies at the time of a mental health diagnosis: qualitative views from Australian health professionals

    Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol

    (2016)
  • SH Sulzer et al.

    Improving patient-centered communication of the borderline personality disorder diagnosis

    J Ment Health

    (2016)
  • AC Milton et al.

    Communication of a mental health diagnosis: a systematic synthesis and narrative review

    J Ment Health

    (2014)
  • International Classification of Diseases (ICD) information sheet

  • W-C Hwang

    Diagnostic nondisclosure of schizophrenia to Chinese American patients

    Asian J Counselling

    (2008)
  • L Lampe et al.

    Diagnostic processes in mental health: GPs and psychiatrists reading from the same book but on a different page

    Australas Psychiatry

    (2012)
  • S Outram et al.

    Communicating a schizophrenia diagnosis to patients and families: a qualitative study of mental health clinicians

    Psychiatr Serv

    (2014)
  • E van Rijswijk et al.

    Barriers in recognising, diagnosing and managing depressive and anxiety disorders as experienced by Family Physicians; a focus group study

    BMC Fam Pract

    (2009)
  • GM Reed

    Toward ICD-11: improving the clinical utility of WHO's International Classification of mental disorders

    Prof Psychol

    (2010)
  • G Shepherd et al.

    Making recovery a reality

  • G Aref-Adib et al.

    A qualitative study of online mental health information seeking behaviour by those with psychosis

    BMC Psychiatry

    (2016)
  • S-Y Baik et al.

    The recognition of depression: the primary care clinician's perspective

    Ann Fam Med

    (2005)
  • P Barker

    Points of view

    Nursing Times

    (1994)
  • A Barnable et al.

    Having a sibling with schizophrenia: a phenomenological study

    Res Theory Nurs Pract

    (2006)
  • DR Bartsch et al.

    Understanding the experience of parents with a diagnosis of borderline personality disorder

    Aust Psychol

    (2016)
  • AC Bilderbeck et al.

    Psychiatric assessment of mood instability: qualitative study of patient experience

    Br J Psychiatry

    (2014)
  • G Black et al.

    What do people in forensic secure and community settings think of their personality disorder diagnosis? A qualitative study

    Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol

    (2013)
  • S Bril-Barniv et al.

    A qualitative study examining experiences and dilemmas in concealment and disclosure of people living with serious mental illness

    Qual Health Res

    (2017)
  • PA Carney et al.

    Variations in approaching the diagnosis of depression: a guided focus group study

    J Fam Pract

    (1998)
  • H Castillo

    Temperament or trauma? Users' views on the nature and treatment of personality disorder

    Ment Health Learn Disabil Care

    (2000)
  • H Castillo

    You don't know what it's like

    Ment Health Care

    (2000)
  • H Castillo

    A dangerous diagnosis

    Ment Health Today

    (2003)
  • H Castillo et al.

    The hurtfulness of a diagnosis: user research about personality disorder

    Ment Health Pract

    (2001)
  • S Ramon et al.

    Experiencing personality disorder: a participative research

    Int J Soc Psychiatry

    (2001)
  • M Charles et al.

    The complex subject of psychosis

    Psychoanal Cult Soc

    (2012)
  • RM de Oliveira et al.

    The meaning and implications of schizophrenia from the perspective of people who experience it

    Acta Sci

    (2013)
  • K Delmas et al.

    Recording past experiences: a qualitative study of how patients and family members adjust to the diagnosis of bipolar disorder

    J Nerv Ment Dis

    (2012)
  • S Dinos et al.

    Stigma: the feelings and experiences of 46 people with mental illness

    Br J Psychiatry

    (2004)
  • P Farzad Nawabi

    Lifting the veil on invisible identities: a grounded theory of self-disclosure for college students with mood disorders

    (2004)
  • M Ferriter et al.

    Experiences of parents with a son or daughter suffering from schizophrenia

    J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs

    (2003)
  • K Fletcher et al.

    Patient satisfaction with the Black Dog Institute Depression Clinic

    Australas Psychiatry

    (2008)
  • E Ford et al.

    “You don't immediately stick a label on them”: a qualitative study of influences on general practitioners' recording of anxiety disorders

    BMJ Open

    (2016)
  • DM Frank et al.

    Experiences of self-esteem in outpatients diagnosed with psychosis: a phenomenological study

    J Humanist Psychol

    (2012)
  • FJ Frese et al.

    On consumer advocacy and the diagnosis of mental disorders

    Prof Psychol Res Pract

    (2010)
  • A Gallagher et al.

    Service users' experience of receiving bad news about their mental health

    J Ment Health

    (2010)
  • Cited by (73)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text