1. Objectifs

Intentions :
«This exploratory study was aimed at developing a better understanding of the quality of care for migrant families including the process of accessing care and receiving collaborative YMH [youth mental health] services as well as the efficiency of such services and the degree of satisfaction with them.» (p. 1937)

2. Méthode

Échantillon/Matériau :
L’échantillon comporte 15 participants au total, c’est-à-dire des triades de 5 jeunes, 5 parents et 5 cliniciens. The «[i]nclusion criteria for youths were: being 12–17 years old, coming from a migrant family (either the family or parents having immigrated), and having received mental health services in a collaborative setting for at least 6 months.» (p. 1938) «The study took place in a primary-care, community based health and social service center (CSSS) (Montréal, Canada) that serves a multiethnic population and has three local services centers [...].» (p. 1937)

Instruments :
Guide d’entretien semi-directif

Type de traitement des données :
Analyse de contenu

3. Résumé

«Our results based on the thematic analysis by actor category suggest that migrant youth and their parents are particularly concerned with YMH care settings and how comfortable they are with such venues, as well as with the integration of family issues into treatment. Clinicians emphasize the collaborative aspect of care while focusing on its systemic context. They address the importance of interprofessional and institutional support, while underscoring the need to understand family vulnerability and any sociocultural factors influencing care. […] Based on these results, four themes emerged that should be further researched as potential elements of an optimal care setting for collaborative YMH services for migrant families: (1) establishing an equilibrium between communication, collaboration and privacy/confidentiality, (2) special attention to ensuring the continuity of care and the creation of a welcoming environment where trusting relationships can develop, (3) the inclusion of family intervention, and (4) the provision of collaborative decision-making pathways to care, addressing interprofessional and interinstitutional collaboration as well as cultural differences in explanatory models and values.» (p. 1944)