I didn’t know about this. The Finns cure psychosis directly with a therapy called ‘‘open dialogue’’. They have scientific support.
The evidence is low quality and shows bias. This is not a thing until it is backed by solid research.
2 Likes
I was going to comment but since the video was so long I didnt view much and didnt think I would be sufficiently informed to do so.
I think I’m going to anyway and hope it applies to the video.
In my experience here on the forum and my own personal experience with psychosis:
- Only people that have reached a certain point of insight can be reached through dialogue. And even then, many you get through to revert back to the same beliefs eventually. This is of course refering to schizophrenic psychosis. Psychosis in general can ‘wear off’ on its own if it was triggered by drugs or something.
- There are some people that are so absorbed in their delusions they are almost unreachable at that point in psychosis and its very rare to get through to them.
So, IMHO, dialogue is worth the effort of trying, but is often not easy and may not be effective at all in the short(used loosely) term.
And antipsychotics are often the key to getting you to the point that you are reachable.
2 Likes
They provide the foundation to build everything else on.
3 Likes
Conversation with AI
is there any scientific evidence that open dialogue cures psychosis?
Open Dialogue (OD) is an approach to mental health care that has generated considerable interest. However, the evidence regarding its efficacy is mixed. Let me summarize the findings:
-
Review of the Evidence:
- A systematic review of studies on OD found that the evidence comes from various methodologies (case studies, qualitative, and naturalistic designs).
- Quantitative studies lacked methodological rigor and presented a high risk of bias, making it challenging to draw conclusions about OD’s efficacy for individuals with psychosis.
- Qualitative studies also had limitations.
- While initial findings have been interpreted as promising, no strong conclusions can be drawn about OD’s efficacy due to variation in models, outcome measures, and implementation strategies.
- Randomized controlled trials are needed for further conclusions¹.
-
Specific Evidence:
- After 5 years of OD treatment in Lapland, 81% of participants had no remaining psychotic symptoms and 81% returned to full employment⁵.
- However, this evidence is not from randomized controlled trials.
-
Ongoing Research:
- Further robust studies evaluating the utility of open dialogue are ongoing⁶.
In summary, while OD shows promise, more rigorous research is needed to establish its effectiveness in treating psychosis. It’s essential to continue evaluating OD, especially given its adoption by mental health services worldwide. 
Source: Conversation with Copilot, 05/07/2024
(1) Open Dialogue: A Review of the Evidence. Psychiatry Online.
(2) Open Dialogue: A New Approach to Mental Healthcare. Open Dialogue: A New Approach to Mental Healthcare | Psychology Today.
(3) Open dialogue in the UK: qualitative study - Cambridge University Press … https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/9400A61DC7AF33A4AFC24CB3D1FB4EA2/S2056472419000383a.pdf/open_dialogue_in_the_uk_qualitative_study.pdf.
(4) Open Dialogue: The Evidence and Further Research. Psychiatry Online.
(5) Open Dialogue: A New Approach to Mental Healthcare. Open Dialogue: A New Approach to Mental Healthcare | Psychology Today.
(6) Retrospective Experiences of First-Episode Psychosis Treatment Under … Retrospective Experiences of First-Episode Psychosis Treatment Under Open Dialogue-Based Services: A Qualitative Study | Community Mental Health Journal.
(7) Open dialogue in the UK: qualitative study - Cambridge Core. Open dialogue in the UK: qualitative study | BJPsych Open | Cambridge Core.
4 Likes
This topic was automatically closed 95 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.