Clinical Practice
Think about a familiar clinical practice area where interest groups are attempting to bring about a change in clinical care or systems of service delivery. Assume new, game-changing research finding are published and received wide attention. Identify groups that might have an interest in these finding. What are their likely reactions to new research?
The discussion must address the topic.
Rationale must be provided
400 words in your initial post by Wednesday 23:59 pm
Minimum of two scholarly references in APA format within the last five years published
You must post two answers to your peers peers of 200 words by Thursday 23:59 pm.
Answers:
One of the familiar clinical practice areas that interest groups are attempting to bring about a change in clinical care or systems of service delivery is mental health. Mental health advocacy groups have been vocal in their efforts to increase funding and awareness of mental health issues. The World Health Organization reports that depression is the leading cause of disability worldwide, affecting over 264 million people, and that half of all mental health conditions begin by the age of 14. The prevalence and severity of mental health conditions call for innovative and evidence-based interventions that require continuous research.
Suppose new game-changing research findings are published and receive wide attention in mental health. In that case, there are several groups that might have an interest in these findings and will likely react differently. Mental health clinicians and providers, patients, insurance companies, policymakers, and mental health advocacy groups are some of the groups that might have an interest in these findings.
Mental health clinicians and providers would be interested in new research findings to improve the quality of care they provide. They will likely react positively and embrace the new findings and incorporate them into their practice. Patients with mental health conditions would also be interested in new research findings that offer hope for better treatment outcomes. They may be more willing to seek help and adhere to treatment recommendations when they have access to evidence-based interventions.
Insurance companies would likely have a mixed reaction to new research findings. While they may see the potential benefit of providing coverage for evidence-based interventions, they may also be concerned about the cost implications. New interventions and treatments are often expensive, and insurance companies may be hesitant to provide coverage for them.
Policymakers would be interested in new research findings that offer an opportunity to improve mental health outcomes and reduce the economic burden of mental health conditions. They would likely be supportive of evidence-based interventions that are cost-effective and have the potential to reduce healthcare costs in the long term.
Mental health advocacy groups would likely embrace new research findings that provide a better understanding of mental health conditions and offer evidence-based interventions. They would likely use this research to advocate for increased funding and support for mental health services and to promote awareness of mental health issues.
In conclusion, new game-changing research findings in mental health will likely elicit different reactions from various interest groups. Mental health clinicians, patients, and mental health advocacy groups would likely embrace the findings, while insurance companies and policymakers may have mixed reactions.