The first Portuguese Open Dialogue pilot project intervention

Sofia Tavares; Joana Ribeiro; Sofia Graça; Bruna Araújo; Mariana Puchivailo; João G Pereira

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1175700

The first Portuguese Open Dialogue pilot project intervention

Front Psychol. 2023 Sep 7:14:1175700. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1175700. eCollection 2023.

Authors

Sofia Tavares^{1

2}, Joana Ribeiro^#³, Sofia Graça^#⁴, Bruna Araújo^#⁴, Mariana Puchivailo^#⁵, João G Pereira⁴

Affiliations

¹ Department of Psychology, Évora University, Évora, Portugal.
² Department of Psychology, CIEP, University of Évora, Évora, Portugal.
³ Instituto Universitário de Ciências Psicológicas, Sociais e da Vida (ISPA)-Instituto Universitário, Lisbon, Portugal.
⁴ Romão de Sousa Foundation, Estremoz, Portugal.
⁵ Department of Psychology, FAE University Center, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.

^# Contributed equally.

Abstract

Introduction: In 2020, the Directorate General of Health (DGS), a central service of the Ministry of Health in Portugal, approved and co-financed the first Open Dialogue program in the country. The present report aims to demonstrate the preliminary results of the first year of the project, implemented in the northern interior region of Alentejo.

Methods: Seven people at the Center of Concern (PCC) and 21 family members/social networks received care through Open Dialogue; four external social workers and psychologists were also involved in the project as members of the support network. A total of 160 network meetings were undertaken, reaching as many as 27 per month in the busiest periods. Based on a previous Italian Research Protocol, developed by Pocobello et al. (non-published manuscript), quantitative and qualitative data were collected in and after the clinical meetings involving PCC and their family/social network, through a multi-method approach: clinical history interview (e.g., generic research on sociodemographic data, duration of untreated symptoms, reasons for requesting help, possible hospitalizations, and/or treatments/therapies) and the following scales applied every five sessions (e.g., CORE-OM, BSI, GAF, and LSNS-6).

Results: The preliminary results indicate an improvement in global functioning and the enlargement of social network size/support, a decrease in symptoms, and a negative correlation between the number of sessions and the LSNS6. Medication use remained largely unchanged at the end of the project.

Discussion: In general, even with a small sample, the results are considered satisfactory and seem to be aligned with the vast majority of Open Dialogue studies, which for several decades have consistently pointed toward better recovery rates than treatment as usual as well as increased client satisfaction. We expect that the results presented can boost further research and help strengthen the OD approach.

Keywords: Open Dialogue; democratic approaches; dialogic practice; mental health care; psychiatric crisis.