Tidal Model Of Mental Health Recovery: A Literature Review

Globally, major depressive disorder (MDD) is among the top five public health concerns today (Cuijpers et al., 2011; Jakobsen, Hansen, Simonsen, & Gluud, 2011; Hees, Rotter, Ellermann, & Evers, 2013). Moreover, almost 20% of patients with depression engage in self-harming behaviors, including suicidal attempts (Gamble et al., 2013; Jakobsen et al., 2011). Not only is the prevalence of depression alarming, but costly to the health care system (Cuijpers et al., 2011; Cuijpers et al., 2014; Hees et al., 2013; Jakobsen et al., 2011). The use of antidepressants is the standard for initial treatment, but may be limiting in preventing relapse (Cuijpers et al., 2014; Jakobsen et al., 2011). Therefore, the inclusion of non-pharmacological interventions may be necessary to improve treatment outcomes (Cuijpers et al., 2011; Dekker et al., 2013; Jakobsen et al., 2011). Interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) and cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) are the two primary psychotherapeutic interventions recommended in the treatment of depression. In this paper, I will discuss the difference between CBT and IPT, compare the effectiveness between both therapies, explore their efficacy as an adjunct treatment with antidepressant medications, and summarize the treatment guidelines for depression.

In discussing the implications of a recovery model on service users/survivors and mental health services, it is essential to define recovery. In illustrating the controversial nature of this concept it is pragmatic to discuss service users and workers in mental health because implications of the recovery model affect both, but in different ways. It is important to realize there is a division in the focus of each group; service users generally want independence from services while health care providers focus on methods and models (Bonney & Stickley, 2008). In working together both groups can improve the provision of recovery services.

Mental health is a complex phenomenon that consists of a range of diagnoses, treatments and outcomes. Recovery from such experiences has historically meant to completely remove all symptoms of illness, but is now currently thought of as regaining a sense of control over and development of a new meaning and purpose in one’s life, rather than feeling defined by the illness. Each individual understands it in their own personal way, likened to a journey towards self-determination, choice, and empowerment.

Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is among the most extensively tested psychotherapies for depression. Many studies have confirmed the efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) as a treatment for depression. This paper will provide background information about the intervention, address the target population, and describe program structure and key components. It will also provide examples of program implementation, challenges/barriers to implementing the practice, address how the practice supports recovery from a serious mental illness standpoint and provide a summary. Although there are several types of therapy available to treat depression and other mood disorders, CBT (cognitive behavioral therapy) has been one of the most widely

In mental health the concept of recovery is a contrast to the medical context to which we are accustomed to. Individuals experiencing mental illnesses have expressed recovery to be “elusive, not perfectly linear… erratic, we flatter, slide back and regroup…establish a sense of integrity and purpose” (Roads to recovery, n.d.), which reflects

Regarding the treatment of mental illness, there are two effective forms that have caused considerable debates in the field of psychology: the medical and the recovery models. While there are significant differences between these two models, they are both effective when used concurrently. The efficacy of the medical model alone is diminishing as it focuses too narrowly on treatment goals, and may ignore the needs of the client. On the other hand, the recovery model focuses on the client and allows them to take control of their treatment and rehabilitation, which helps promote positive change. Recovery is often seen as a lifelong journey that requires the client to be wholly involved in the recovery process. This is why the recovery model values

Contemporary mental health care is a changing and developing field. Traditional practices of understanding and caring for those with mental illness are being challenged (Trenoweth, 2017). Personal recovery is not a new concept. Although it is significantly different to the biomedical model, it has been well written about in literature, putting a significant influence on policies and the delivery of care within today’s practices. When people with a lived experience of mental illness started to challenge the biomedical model of care, recovery orientated health care began to grow (Barkway, 2013). Before further exploring both personal recovery and the biomedical approach, we will look at what recovery is. Slade (2009) outlines a two part definition

Throughout the mental health literature, there is not one set definition of the concept of recovery as there are many interpretations of what it is, and what it entails (Jacobson & Greenley, 2001).

Reviews of research on psychotherapy versus antidepressants with evidence supported methods were used. WebPages along with the reading of numerous studies

Treatments using anti-depressants is well documented, but there are very few studies documenting only the use of psychotherapy. However, in one study done using the Cognitive–behavioral analysis system of psychotherapy (CBASP) as a maintenance treatment, the overall findings show that psychotherapy in itself can be successful. “ There were 82 patients who were treated with CBASP long term. Patients were chosen at random to reduce their treatment to monthly or to an observational status. The patients, only treated monthly with CBASP, showed a smaller amount of reoccurring symptoms then the patients in the observational status. These findings support the use of only CBASP as a maintenance treatment for depression.” (Klein, 2004)

The following essay is a case study of a client named John who is suffering from major depression and was sent to see me for treatment by his concerned wife. I will provide brief background information about John then further discuss interventions and strategies I believe can be applied in each session with my client in order to make John's life more manageable. In the essay, I will be writing as the therapist, and the sessions are based on a ten week period.

As the literature remains inconclusive as to the relation between current major treatment modalities and depressive disorder, and given the extremities of the potential dangers of antidepressant medications, it is apparent that there is a need to develop new interventions, which show greater efficacy, safety, and acceptability.

Major depressive disorder affects nearly 15 million of American adults in a given year. (Kessler, Chiu, Demler & Walters, 2005). With the impact it has on the society as well as the well-being of the individual, it must be in the interest of the healthcare to be able to provide patients with the most effective treatment method. Extensive research has been conducted on the efficacy of antidepressant medication and cognitive therapy, the two main treatment methods used for depression today. The discussion has, however, been characterized by conflicting claims, resulting in a debate over what should be used rather than us having definite conclusion of how patients are best helped.

‘Recovery from a mental health problem can be understood either as an outcome or as a process.’ Also known as ‘clinical recovery’ an outcome is present depends on whether the symptoms/problems are present or absent (Serafín Lemos-Giráldez 2015). Usually involving a reduction or absence of symptoms and a significant improvement in occupational and social functioning, an outcome does not change from person to person. On the other hand, individuals who go through a process in order to live a joyful and fulfilling life, experience personal recovery. (Serafín Lemos-Giráldez 2015). This form of recovery involves learning to become self-managing of one’s illness, whether recurring symptoms are at that point in time present and working towards a self-caring, independent and fulfilling life. The definition of a satisfying like varies from one individual to the next. This is why each consumer’s recovery journey is personal and tailored to fit their goals and beliefs (Serafín Lemos-Giráldez 2015).

This metaparadigm serves to explain the full context of health care and of nursing specifically. It is little less than the totality of all things that impact on the recovery of the patient. Home life, mental state, addictions, physical pain, chances of relapse, rewarding work and a host of other variables come to define the context of recovery. All of these clearly impact recovery, or even the patient's desire for recovery. This also includes social and cultural dimensions such as religious belief and general attitudes toward death and suffering.